Skip to main content

Full text of "The Urge To The Sea The Course Of Russian History"

See other formats


BoolwwiEl^ issued <^^ 
Hbmi oepdfr 

l&W$d oterwfee, teto may be 
els* BWKJWWS fiindlnrf boote tti 
faced or muwatel ox ea0tea to MJpCEt sttt*^ ttt 

PnLIic Library 

( iW8^*^pp(HMP|jV i ' ^^T^gF JF *w^HWi 

' ,l, l , ' I .1' !), j fcu f ! 


V .?? 

-/./-<? ; 



Japanese Expansion on the Asiatic Continent 

(In three volumes) 
Volume I, 1937, xvi + 374 pp. 
Volume II, 1940, xii + 416 pp. 


Northeastern Asia: A Selected Bibliography 

(In two volumes) 

Volume 1, 1939, xl -f 676 pp. 

Volume II, 1939, xxxii 4- 622 pp. 



****** t 

The Course of Russian History 




University of California Press 
Berkeley and Los Angeles 1942 








JLOR HISTORIANS, and in fact for most 
social scientists, the expansion of Russia and the building by 
the Russian people of a vast Eurasian empire is a story of major 
importance. What forces, geographic or economic, political or 
social, material or spiritual, became active in that urge to the 
sea which was a prime factor of Russian expansion into three 
continents? Through what instruments and in what ways did 
these forces act? And what do they imply for the future as their 
activity gains direction? These and many other questions are 
raised, if we view this problem in the long perspective. Ade- 
quate answers would give fuller meaning not only to the en- 
tire sweep of Russian history, but possibly also to the history 
of Europe and Asia. In this monograph the role of rivers, por- 
tages, ostrogs, monasteries, and furs is analyzed with a view 
to indicating their respective parts in this absorbing story. 
Here geography and history , economics and politics, religion 
and social life were but components > or adjuncts, of one pow- 
erful force which carried a people from the innermost sources 
of great rivers to the majestic seas into which they flow. 

My interest in this subject was first aroused seven years ago 
by work on a monographic and documentary history of Rus- 
sian eastward expansion. The role of the factors enumerated 
above indicated that they constituted the driving power and 
the mechanics of the expansion. A study of these factors in 


Russian history from early times indicated that they were at 
work in the whole course of Russia's historical development 
and in all directions to the seas. A preliminary statement was 
given to the press on February 10, 1937 (see New York Times, 
February 23, 1937)- 

I have no desire to emphasize any deterministic interpreta- 
tion, nor to lay claim to the complete working out of this 
set of factors in every detail of every epoch and region of Rus- 
sian history. That would represent the task of a lifetime. All 
that I have endeavored to do has been to indicate the chief 
factors at work, the main direction and character of their ac- 
tion, and the results of their activity? The rest I must leave to 
other scholars as they work through the history of the Russian 
people and have an opportunity through detailed research to 
confirm or to reject the indicated influence of rivers, portages, 
ostrogs, monasteries, and furs on the course of Russian history. 

For those who would pursue this subject farther the numer- 
ous footnotes will give ample opportunity. A critical analysis 
of the bibliography thus offered will indicate thatZ. Khodakov- 
skii ("Puti soobshcheniiav drevnei Rossii? Russkii istoricheskii 
sbornik, Moscow, r8tf, I, 1-50} first thoroughly studied the 
means of communication in ancient Russia. He offered many 
valuable observations on his personal investigations and on ma- 
terials which he collected about trade routes, rivers, and por- 
tages. He did not perceive the interrelations of the factors he 
studied so far as they pertain to this study. 

1 The groundwork of a new synthesis of Russian history, as well as of the 
Russian eastward movement, based on heretofore undigested and uncorrelated 
sources, as well as on unrelated studies, has been laid in the personal researches 
of the author and in the series of studies of his graduate students at the Uni- 
versity of California. This monograph is a brief preliminary exposition of only 
i part of the work. 


Apparently without knowledge of Khodakovskii's contribu- 
tion,, the eminent Russian historian., Sergei Mikhailovich So- 
lov'ev-to whom this study is dedicated first clearly pointed 
out the historical importance of the factors involved, in the 
first chapter of the first volume of his History of Russia from 
the Earliest Times (Istoriia Rossii s drevneishikh vremen, first 
published in 1851). He confined his penetrating observations, 
brief but brilliant, chiefly to the early and medieval period. 
N. P. Barsov, using Nestor's chronicle as a basis, turned his 
attention to the ancient and early medieval periods and cast 
much light on the subject from the point of view of the histori- 
cal geographer. 

The distinguished Russian historian, V. O. Kliuchevskii, 
whose main thesis is that "the history of Russia is the history 
of a country in the process of colonization" (Kurs russkoi isto- 
rii, I, 24), necessarily touches on the influence of the factors 
emphasized in the present study, but chiefly in a more general 
way than would be expected; when he is confronted with the 
possibility of a (f river policy" on the part of the early Muscovite 
princes, we find him asking himself whether expansion was 
the result of ef some plan [or policy] which evolved of itself " 
(Kurs, II, j<5). We shall look more closely at that evolution, and 
may find more than self-evolvement there. 



AN THE PREPARATION of this study 
since its inception seven years ago, I have been assisted by a 
number of my former students. 1 am especially in debt to Dr. 
George V. Lantzeffc Research Fellow in History, who acted as 
my research assistant during the last three years and who re- 
lieved me of much drudgery in the verification of numberless 
clues in the many chronicles and extensive documentary pub- 
lications from which this study emerged. For their unfailing 
help in the earlier phases of the work, I desire to thank Dr. Ana- 
tole G. Mazour, now Associate Professor of History in the Uni- 
versity of Nevada, Oleg Maslenikov, Lecturer in Russian, and 
Andrew Malozemoff, now concluding his preparation for the 
doctorate in history* For the attractive maps and illustrations 
I am grateful to George W. Noia. 

Martine Emert efficiently prepared the typewritten manu- 
script and assisted in many other ways. 

I am sincerely grateful for financial assistance from the Insti- 
tute of Social Sciences of the University of California and the 
Works Progress A dministration of the United States Govern- 


C xiii 


A MODIFIED FORM of the Library of Congress system 
has been used. In titles of works in the footnotes 
and in the text the apostrophe (') is inserted for the 
soft sign wherever it can help in the pronunciation 
of the word, but its excessive use has been avoided 
in the interest of economy. 



I. Introduction: The Valdai Hills Region ... i 

II. The "Road from the Varangians to the 

Greeks" The Kievan State 1 1 

III. Novgorod, Gateway to Europe and the Urals . 25 

IV. Moscow, Pivot of Eurasian Empire .... 35 

Moscow's Strategic Position 35 

The Rise of Moscow to the Domination of the 

Upper and Middle Volga Basin 36 

Moscow's Domination of the Caspian-Baltic Sea 

Axis 41 

The Expansion of Muscovite Russia to World 

Empire 54 

Expansion to the Black Sea 54 

Expansion to the Pacific 66 

V. Waterways, Railroads, and Land Highways . . 89 
VI. General Observations and Conclusions . . . 103 


1 . Portages and the Important Russian River Sys- 
tems 107 

2 . Extracts from the Smolensk Trade Codes of 1 22 9 
and 1274, Illustrating the Regulations in Re- 
gard to the Portage from the Western Dvina to 

the Dnieper 153 



3. Extracts from Documents and Other Sources Il- 
lustrating the Fortified Line of 1 57 1 and Its Suc- 
cessors ...... . ....... 155 

4. Seventeenth-Century Descriptions of Portages 
and Ostrogs, and River and Land Transporta- 

tion in Siberia ........... 1 65 

5. A List of the More Important Monasteries in 
Their Relation to the River Systems and the 
Ostrogs ............. 177 

6. A List of Important Siberian Ostrogs . . . . 1 85 
Index ............... 193 


Outer Walls of the Ostrog of lakutsk ..... 78 

A View of lakutsk in the Eighteenth Century . . 79 

Fur Tribute (lasak) Paid at a Siberian Ostrog . . 85 

A Siberian Village in the Seventeenth Century . . 87 

An Ostrog (Blockhouse) and Portage in 

Siberia .............. 



1 . Key Map. Russian River and Portage System 45 

2. The Valdai Hills. Russia's Grand Portage System . . . 67 

3. The Road from the Varangians to the Greeks (from the 
Baltic to the Black Sea) 12 

4. The Eastward Expansion and Trade of 

Novgorod following 26 

5. The Struggle for the Dvina Region Rivalry of Novgorod 

and Volga Princes (i ^th- 1 6th Centuries) . . following 28 

6. The Strategic Position of Moscow 37 

7. Moscow: Northern and Eastward Expansion (i 5th 1 7th 
Centuries) 40 

8. Russo-Swedish-Finnish Frontiers (1618-1940) .... 48 

9. The Advance to the Black Sea: Line of 1571 55 

10. The Advance to the Black Sea: End of the i6th Century 57 

11. The Advance to the Black Sea: The Advance of the 
Frontier to 1687 59 

12. Moscow: Eastward Expansion and Trade in the 

Ob' Basin following 66 

13. Conquest of the Ob' River System (Western Siberia) . 70-71 

14. Russian Eastward Expansion; The Enisei Basin (1618- 
1647) 74 

15. Russian Eastward Expansion: The Lena Basin (1630 
1648) 76-77 

16. Russian Eastward Expansion: The Amur Basin (1648- 
1689) 80 

17. Moscow, Port of Five Seas Q "^ 1 

18. Russia in Asia: (i) Western Siberia 94 

19. Russia in Asia: (2) Central Siberia 96 

20. Russia in Asia: (3) Northeastern Siberia 98 

C xvii 3 

Chapter I ^ Introduction: 
The Valdai Hills Region 

^* Xs_0 - 


JLHERE IS a small upland region in north- 
western Russia, less than one hundred miles square and not 
much more than one thousand feet above sea level at its highest 
point, from which rise great rivers that, either by themselves or 
by easy portages to others, lead through two continents to give 
access to all the seas in the world. The Valdai Hills, 1 the name 
by which this region is known, may be described as embracing 
the most strategic and important portages of Europe and Asia. 
In fact, the region may be regarded as a single grand portage in 
itself and hence the key portage of the world. (See map i .) Early 
in their history the Russian Slavs penetrated into the region of 
the upper reaches of the Western Dvina, Lake Ilmen, the Volga, 
and the Dnieper. 2 And it is the expansion of the Russians down 
the rivers in all directions from this portage region that created 
the "Russian urge to the sea" as will be explained and illus- 
trated in the pages which follow. 

1 See V. Kamenetskii, "Valdaiskaia vozvyshennost'," Bol'shaia sovetskaia ent- 
siklopediia (65 vols. planned, Moscow, 1926; hereafter cited as Bol'shaia sov. 
entsik.), VIII, 629-630; D. N. Anuchin, "Rel'ef poverkhnosti Evropeiskoi Rossii 
v posledovatel'nom razvitii o nem prestavleniij' Zemlevedenie, No. i (Moscow, 
1895), 77-126, No. 4, 65124; idem, Verkhnevolzhskiia ozera i verkhov'ia Zap. 
Dviny (Moscow, 1897); S. Nikitin, Bassein Volgi (St. Petersburg, 1899); G. I. 
Tanfil'ev, Geografiia Rossii, Ukrainy i primykaiushchikh k nim s zapada ter- 
ritorii (Odessa, 1922), part 2, issue i; V. E Semenov-Tian'-Shanskii, Putevoditel' 
"Povolzh'e" (Leningrad, 1925); N. P. Barsov, Ocherki russkoi istoricheskoi geo- 
grafii (Warsaw, 1885). The Valdai Hills region was also called by the chroniclers 
the Okovskii (Vbkovskii, Volokovskii) Forest. The last of these names, "Volo- 
kovskiij' indicates that it was the "Portage Forest'' Barsov, op. cit., pp. 16-17. 

2 A. A. Shakhmatov, Drevneishiia sud'by russkogo plemeni (Petrograd, 1919), 
pp. 10, 28-52, 



Neither the ancient Near Eastern portage of Naharina, situ- 
ated between the Euphrates and the Orontes and linking the 
Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean, nor the Lake Winnipeg 
district in North America can approach the Valdai Hills coun- 
try in the range of its access to two continents, and only Naha- 
rina can compare in historical importance with the Valdai Hills. 

Of the portage of Naharina, Moret and Davy give the fol- 
lowing testimony: 8 

The Plain of Naharina [is] . . . the keystone of the arch of the 
Fertile Crescent. 

To insure the security of Egypt in the face of a threatening or rest- 
less Asia Minor, only one tactic could be effective the military oc- 
cupation of the branch of the Fertile Crescent which leads from the 
Euphrates to the Isthmus [of Egypt], and the establishment of a 
bridgehead at the extremity of the corridor of invasion i.e. in 
this region of Naharina which is the glacis upon which the routes 
through Cilicia, Anatolia and the Euphrates Valley converge. . . . 
It is always in Syria that great captains have defended the gates 
of Egypt. 

Naharina [is] a strategic position of the utmost importance at the 
junction of the roads which lead from Mesopotamia to the Black 
Sea, the Mediterranean, and Egypt, and in the inverse direction. 

Of the Lake Winnipeg center of North America's river and 
portage system, Lawrence J- Burpee writes as follows: 4 

It is not merely theoretically possible to travel in a canoe across 
the continent, east and west, north and south, with an occasional 
portage, but the fact has been demonstrated over and over again 
by explorers and fur traders. From Lake Winnipeg, in the heart 'of 
the continent, one may paddle east up Winnipeg River to the Lake 
of the Woods, thence by Rainy River, Rainy Lake, and a series of 

3 See, for suggestive material, Alexandra Moret arid Charles Davy, From Tribe 
to Empire (New York, 1926), pp. 240, 264, 303; Alexandre Moret, The Nile and 
Egyptian Civilization (New York, 1927); Richard Thoumin, Geographie humaine 
de la Syrie Centrale (Paris, 1936). 

4 See Lawrence J. Burpee, "Highways of the Fur Trade? Transactions of the 
Royal Society of Canada, Ser. Ill, Sec. II, Vol. VIII (September, 1914), pp. 183- 
192; Archer B. Hulbert, Portage Paths, the Keys of the Continent (Cleveland, 
1903) and Waterways of Westward Expansion: The Ohio River and Its Tribu- 
taries (Cleveland, 1903). 


smaller waterways over the almost imperceptible height of land 
and down to Lake Superior, coast along the shore of that inland 
sea, descend the St. Mary's River to Lake Huron, and from there 
either follow the Great Lakes down to the St. Lawrence, or take the 
old route by way of Georgian Bay, French River, Lake Nipissing, 
and the Ottawa to Montreal. From Lake Winnipeg, again, one 
may take either the Hayes route or the Nelson to Hudson Bay. 
From the same central lake, one may ascend the Saskatchewan to 
the Rocky Mountains and descend the Columbia to the Pacific; or, 
leaving the Saskatchewan at Cumberland Lake, paddle through a 
series of small waterways to the Churchill, ascend that river to Lake 
LaLoche, descend the Clearwater to the Athabaska, the latter to 
Lake Athabaska, ascend Peace River to one of its sources at the 
headwaters of the Parsnip, portage to the Fraser, and descend that 
wild stream to the ocean. Again, following the last route to the 
Athabaska, one may descend Slave River to Great Slave Lake, 
and follow the mighty Mackenzie to the Arctic. Finally, returning 
once more to Lake Winnipeg, one may ascend the Red River to its 
upper waters, portage to the Mississippi and descend the Father of 
Waters to the Gulf of Mexico. And these are but a few of many pos- 
sible routes from Lake Winnipeg to the shores of the three oceans. 
The fur traders did not need any gift of shrewdness to lead them to 
the adoption of water routes. Water routes were practically thrust 
upon them. Wherever they went they found some river flowing to 
or from the place they sought, and that river was generally the 
easiest and often the only road to follow. 

It was the Valdai Hills region, some hundred miles south of 
Novgorod, two hundred miles northwest of Moscow, and about 
five hundred miles north of Kiev, that the Scandinavian Va- 
rangians, usually known as the Vikings, utilized in order to 
trade from the Baltic to the Black and Caspian seas. (See map 
2.) It was the nerve center of the first Russian state based on 
Itiev and Novgorod, which never relaxed its grip on this por- 
tage system until the Kievan state went to pieces. It was this 
region that held the key to the empire built up by Novgorod 
the Great after the fall of Kiev. It controlled Novgorod's access 
to food in the south and the southeast, and her fur empire to 
the north and northeast, without which the empire could not 





exist. It was this region that Moscow wrested from Novgorod 
late in the fifteenth century in its drive for markets and natural 
resources. The acquisition at that time of the necessary part of 
this portage region for a Baltic-Caspian trade route, and of the 
rest of it in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, made it 
possible for Moscow to dominate the whole of the eastern Euro- 
pean plain and to expand to the five seas: westward to the Bal- 
tic, southward to the Black and the Caspian, northward to the 
Arctic, and eastward to the Pacific. 


The successive overlordship of this region, which embraces 
the sources of the Volga, the Dnieper, the Western Dvina, and 
the Lovat', by the Swedes, by the early Russians of Kiev and 
Novgorod, and by the Muscovites, taught its possessors the 
secret of the mastery of eastern Europe. In brief, this secret lay 
in the domination of river systems and the control of portages 
between them by means of ostrogs (blockhouses) or of fortified 
monasteries. Smolensk, Torzhok, and Moscow were originally 
ostrogs. Smolensk was the key ostrog of the main highway of 



SCALE 1:1500000 



the Dnieper. The grand portage of the Valdai Hills region (see 
map 2) controlled in all four directions the trade routes and the 
movements of population, and determined as well the high 
strategy of interstate politics. It was a dominant factor in the 
history of Russia. 

In the historical perspective over the centuries, one item in 
the trade which this and other portages in Russia controlled 
stands out as a permanent and usually the most important fea- 
ture. That item was furs. Slaves, amber, forest products, and 
other commodities played their several parts at one time or 
another; but furs were always the most valuable single item o 
trade from the very earliest beginnings to the eighteenth cen- 
tury and beyond. 

The Western Dvina, rising from the Valdai Hills upland 
basin, flows into the Baltic. The Lovat' joins Lake Ilmen, on 
which Novgorod stands. From Lake Ilmen the route passes 
along rivers and through lakes to the Baltic and even to the 
White Sea and the Pacific. The Dnieper flows into the Black 
Sea and gives access by portages through the Volga system at 
several places to the Caspian. The Western Dvina and the Dnie- 
per lead by portages into the Niemen, the ancient axis of Lithu- 
ania, and into the Vistula, the vital nerve chord of Poland, and 
from them into the rivers of central and western Europe, which 
empty into the North Sea and the Atlantic Ocean. 5 The Volga 
flows into the Caspian. By portages to the east it opens the way 
over the Ural Mountains into that remarkable series of Sibe- 
rian river systems which finally reaches the Pacific, and by 
portages to the north the Volga leads to the White and Barents 
seas and the Arctic Ocean. 

These fundamentals, buttressed hereafter by conclusive evi- 
dence from the sources, indicate that the Valdai Hills region, 
in which these great rivers take their origin, has played a role 
beyond all imagination in the destiny of eastern Europe and 

B Lucien Febvre, A Geographical Introduction to History (London, 1925), pp. 
316 ff.; also E. Romer, "Probl&mes tenitoriaux de la Pologner Scientia 

-p VVtTTTT ~...~ ~ -00 


Asia. 6 From it came the Russian urge to the sea. From it sprang 
the Russian motive to colonial expansion. Out of it came the 
Russian empire, which at one time spread over three con- 

6 For suggestions relative to China see Ch'ao-ting Chi, Key Economic Areas in 
Chinese History as Revealed in the Development of Public Works for Water Con- 
trol (London, 1936); K. A. Wittfogel, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft Chinas (Leip- 
zig, 1931), I. 

Chapter II * "The Road 
from the Varangians to the 
Greeks" The Kievan State 


JLH ERICHEST and most Important city In 
Europe from the eighth to the thirteenth century was Constan- 
tinople. It was the focal point of trade routes from Asia and 
Europe. Among the most important of these trade routes in 
Europe if not the most important was that which connected 
the Black and the Baltic seas. "There is a road" so explains the 
chronicle, "from the Varangians to the Greeks. From the Greeks 
it runs along the Dnieper and up the Dnieper by portage to 
the Lovat'. The Lovat' flows into the great Lake Ilmer [Ilmen], 
and from that lake there flows the Volkhov which descends into 
the great Lake Nevo [Ladoga]. That lake empties into the Va- 
rangian Sea [the Baltic] . On that sea it is possible to go to Rome, 
and from Rome by that same sea to Tsargorod [Constantinople] 
and from Tsargorod into the Sea o Pontus [the Black Sea], into 
which flows the Dnieper. The Dnieper takes its source in the 
forest of Okov, and flows to the south; the Dvina takes its source 
in the same forest and flows to the north, emptying into the 
Varangian Sea; from the same forest the Volga takes its source 
on the east and flows through a delta with seventy branches 
into the Sea of Khvalin [the Caspian]!' 1 (See map 3.) It was the 

1 Arkheograficheskaia Kommissiia, Polnoe sobranie russkikh letopisei (24 vols., 
St. Petersburg, 1846-1914; hereafter cited as P.S.RJL.), I, 3; V. A. Brim, "Put* iz 
Variag v Greki," Izvestiia akademii nauk S.S.S.R., Ser. VII, Otdelenie obshchest- 
vennykh nauk, No. 2 (1931), pp- 201-249. 






domination of this road from the Varangians to the Greeks 
through the grand portage system which became the basis of 
the first Russian state, known as Kievan Russia. Four centuries 
of Russian history gain a meaning by virtue of foreign trade 
and the strategic significance of this highway. When this basis 
was undermined the Kievan state disintegrated. 

From the Baltic the grand portage basin of the Valdai Hills 
region may be reached by water by at least two well-marked 
routes: first, by the Baltic-Novgorod route, which lay up the 
Neva River, Lake Ladoga, the Volkhov River and its tribu- 
taries, and Lake Ilmen; and second, by the Western Dvina 
route. Once in the Valdai Hills region, portages lead from Lake 
Ilraen up the Lovat' and its tributaries to the Western Dvina 
and from that river to the Dnieper, which empties into the 
Black Sea, or from the Lovat' and its tributaries to the Volga 
system. (See map 2 and App. i.) 

The western part of this system may have been used by the 
Goths when they left their northern homeland and reached the 
shores of the Black Sea. It is entirely likely that they even lived 
along this highway for some time and built settlements, per- 
haps even large towns, on it. At any rate, the Russian Slavs and 
the Scandinavian Varangians or Vikings fell heir to whatever 
was accomplished or left behind by these peoples. 2 

The Varangians, if we are to trust the little evidence that 
remains, appear first to have used the Western Dvina route, and 
only later what became known as the Baltic-Novgorod route, 3 
The hardy adventurers and traders of Sweden began penetrat- 
ing these regions already in part occupied by the Slavs in the 
seventh and eighth centuries in order to dominate the trade 

3 M. Rostovtsev, "The Origin of the Russian State on the Dnieper? Annual 
Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1920 (Washington, 

3 Birger Nerman, "Swedish Viking Colonies on the Baltic? Eurasia Septen- 
trionalis Antiqua (Helsinki, 1934) (Minns Volume), IX, 364-377; and T. J. Arne, 
"La Suede et TOrient. Etudes arch^ologiques sur les relations de la Suede et de 
1'Orient pendant Tige des Vikings" Archives d'Etudes Orientates, VIII (Uppsala, 
1914), 14 ff. 


to the south and east, especially to tap first the trade of Baghdad, 
through the realm of the Khazars along the Volga, and then 
that o Constantinople. Already, about the year 800, the town 
of Hedeby (just south of the present Schleswig in the peninsula 
of Jutland) had been built to dominate the portage between 
the Gulf of Slien on the Baltic and the river Treene, a branch 
of the river Eider, which flows into the North Sea." This route 
from the Baltic to the North Sea across the Jutland peninsula 
gave the Vikings direct access to western Europe. Thus the 
Vikings came to dominate an east-west commercial route which 
begaiTin the Near East at Constantinople, led through Russia 
by the Dnieper-Western Dvina-Lovat' route to the Baltic, and 
then into the North Sea and western Europe. It is in the light 
of this sweeping view that we must conceive the impact of the 
Vikings on Europe during the ninth century. 5 

It was, therefore, no accident that the first Russian state was 
consolidated during the ninth century under the leadership o 
the Scandinavian Varangians at Novgorod in the north and at 
Kiev on the Dnieper in the south. The numerous expeditions 
to the Black Sea and Constantinople indicate that the Varan- 
gian leaders and their Slavic comrades already dominated the 
entire waterway from the Baltic to the Black Sea in that cen- 
tury. By the end of the next century we find the Varangian 
groups Slavicized. 

From the earliest times it is evident that the rivers deter- 
mined the direction of colonization, as well as the creation of 
the four ancient political divisions in Russia: the Novgorodian 
or lake region, centered on Lake Ilmen and the rivers flowing 
into it; the Polotsk region on the middle Western Dvina; the 
Dnieper region, with Kiev as its key ancient Russia proper; 
and the region of Rostov along the upper Volga. The portages 

4 Nerman, op. cit. f pp. 377-380. 

B See T. D. Kendrik, A History of the Vikings (London, 1930), pp. 143-178, and 
Sven Axel Anderson, Viking Enterprise (New York, 1936), pp. 82-98. 

6 S. M. Solov'ev, Istoriia Rossii s drevneishihh vremen (29 vols. in 7, St. Peters- 
burg, 1894-), I, 11-15. This is one of the best accounts of the influence of rivers, 
portages, and ostrogs on early Russian history. 


(called voloki in Russian) 7 between these rivers and lakes served 
usually as territorial and state boundaries they were, so to 
speak, the mountains in the vast plains of Russia. The early 
chronicles and treaties, reread in the light of the present inter- 
pretation, give us hints of the significance of these portages. 

In the early history of Russia the portages naturally became 
sources of dispute between various principalities the bound- 
aries of which they formed. As a result they were often divided 
between the two states concerned, each holding only one side 
of the portage. The boundaries between Novgorod and Tver 
were the portages, or the towns which controlled the portages, 
between them. There wasTbrzhok (NovyiTorg), which guarded 
Vyshnii Volochek, the chief portage between the Msta and the 
Tvertsa, the main water route from Novgorod to Tver. There 
was the portage of the Lama River, called Volok Larnskii with 
the town, Volokolamsk, between the Lama-Shosha tributaries 
of the Volga, and the Istra and Ruza tributaries of the Moskva, 
on which Moscow was built. This was Novgorod's main route 
to the lower Volga. (See map 2.) 

From the treaties of 1265 and 1270 between Novgorod and 
Tver we see that the ruler of Tver is to keep his Bailiffs of the 
Portages (Tiuny) in his half of Torzhok and Volokolamsk, and 
Novgorod in its half of both portage controls. This is expressed 
more pungently in a document which runs as follows: "and 
you, Prince [of Tver], keep the Bailiffs of the Portage in your 
part of Volokolamsk and Tbrzhok, and Novgorod will keep its 
Bailiffs in its part!' 8 

7 The Russian word for portage, volok, by derivation means the place between 
two rivers or bodies of water over which boats were "dragged" or "pulled? rather 
than "carried" as indicated in the word portage. Perevolakivat' and peretaskivat' f 
the Russian verbs used in this connection, definitely point to this practice. See 
Century Dictionary; also 1. 1. Sreznevskii, Materialy dlia slovaria drevnerusskago 
iazyka po pis'mennym pamiatnikam, I, 291, and Bol'shaia sov. entsik., XII, 777- 
778. Apparently, Russian river boats were dragged, while light Indian canoes 
were carried over the portage. On the other hand, the goods in Russian boats 
were often taken out of the boats and carried by the men over the portage. 

8 See Sobranie gosudarstvennykh gramot i dogovorov (5 vols., Moscow, 1813 
1894; hereafter cited as S.G.G, i D.), I, i, 2, 3, 6-8, 27-28; Solov'ev, op. tit., I, 14. 


The strategic region on this Baltic-Black Sea water road, 
guarded at the north by Novgorod with its outpost Torzhok, 
and at the south by Kiev, was the southwestern part o the grand 
portage system of the Valdai Hills region, with the principality 
and town of Smolensk and its dependency, the principality of 
Toropets, as its core. Smolensk stood at the portage from the 
Dnieper to the Western Dvina, and Toropets in the midst of 
several portages from the Western Dvina to the Lovat', and 
from the Dnieper to the Volga. (See App. i, C. Dnieper, x-xiii; 
D. Western Dvina, xi-xviii; A. Volga, xx-xxx.) 

The portage most commonly used from the Lovat' to the 
Western Dvina is in dispute. We do not know whether it 
was that of the Lovat'-Serezha-Toropa-Western Dvina or the 
Lo vat '-Kunia- Lake Dvin'e-Western Dvina or the Lovat' 
Kunia-Usviat-Western Dvina routes. Any one of the routes 
may have been used, possibly one more than the others at dif- 
ferent times. 

There were several routes and hence a number of portages 
from the Western Dvina to the Dnieper. The best known of 
these appears to have been that up the river and Lake Kasplia, 
a tributary of the Western Dvina, up its tributary, the Vydra, 
Lake Kuprino, the Krapivka (or Lelekva), then by portage to 
the River Katynka (a tributary of the Dnieper) to the village 
of Lodyzhnitsa (or Lodenitsa) near Gnezdovo on the Dnieper, 
and then up that river to Smolensk. (See map 2 and App. i, 
A. Volga, xx-xxv; C. Dnieper, iv, viii-xiii; D. Western Dvina, 
xviii; G. Lovat^ i x.) 

This Lovat '-Western Dvina Dnieper portage section of the 
grand portage of the Valdai Hills region appears to have 
emerged historically as belonging chiefly to the principality of 
Smolensk. This principality in the eleventh and twelfth cen- 
turies was kept within the family of the Grand Prince of Kiev, 

9 Brim, op. cit. f pp. 230-232; N. E Barsov, op. dt. f pp. i6-6; and Z. Khoda- 
kovskii, "Puti soobshcheniia v drevnei Rossii" Husskii istoricheskii sbornik 
(Moscow, 1838), I, 1-50; S. M. Seredonin, Istoricheskaia geografiia (Petrograd, 
1916), pp. 228230; Arne, op. cit., p. 15. 


who ruled both at Kiev and Novgorod; that is, it was included 
in the famous rotation system whereby at the death of the 
Grand Prince the six great principalities rotated to male mem- 
bers of the family as a whole in order of their seniority. Smo- 
lensk was assigned by laroslav the Great (1054) to his fifth 
son or the fourth then alive, as Vladimir, the eldest, had died 
before his father. 



After the death of laroslav, Grand Prince of Kiev, 1054, Smolensk 
was ruled by: 

1) Viacheslav, the fifth (then the fourth living) son of laroslav, 

2) Igor, the sixth son of laroslav, 1057-1060 

3) Iziaslav (the second son of laroslav) 

4) Sviatoslav (the third son of laroslav) 

5) Vsevolod (the fourth son of laroslav) 

(Iziaslav, Sviatoslav, and Vsevolod divided the income from 
Smolensk, 1060-1073) 

5) Vsevolod (the fourth son of laroslav) alone, after Sviatoslav 
(4) moved to Kiev, as Grand Prince. Vsevolod remained in 
Chernigov and sent to Smolensk 

6) Vladimir Monomakh, son of Vsevolod (5), 1073-1078 

7) Mstislav, the first son of Vladimir Monomakh (6) 

8) Iziaslav, the second son of Vladimir Monomakh (6) 

9) David, son of Sviatoslav (4), 1095-1097, who seized Smolensk 

After the Liubech Convention (1097), awarding Smolensk to the 
family of Vladimir Monomakh 

10) Sviatoslav, the third son of Vladimir Monomakh (6) until 

11) Mstislav (7), the first son of Vladimir Monomakh (6), 1125- 
1128, or his son, Rostislav Mstislavovich (12), 1125-? 

12) Rostislav, the sixth son of Mstislav (7), 1128-1160 
Hereafter, Smolensk remained in the hands of the Mstislavoviches, 
the descendants of Rostislav Mstislavovich, until its seizure by the 
Lithuanians in 1935." 

*jR5JRX v I, 70, 72, 98, 103, II, 4, 14, 269, 275, 295, V, 139, 148, VII, 2-3, 232-235, 
333, IX, 129; Solov'ev, op. cit., I, 286, 290, 300-302, 305, 322, 327, 339' 3$i; K v 


Under this system Smolensk was not allowed to fall into the 
hands of a prince outside of the succession in the family, nor to 
become an independent principality as did some other parts of 
Russia. For instance, it was never in the hands of the princes 
of Polotsk, who ruled lower down on the Western Dvina and 
carved out for themselves a virtually independent state in the 
Russian system. 10 Furthermore, the prince of Polotsk was not 
allowed to rule in Novgorod. 11 As a minor principality under 
the dominion of Smolensk, Toropets gradually grew more and 
more independent of Smolensk and became more closely con- 
nected with Novgorod, which was especially interested in the 
Lovat'-Western Dvina portage. In the thirteenth century the 
branch of the family of the Mstislavoviches who ruled at Toro- 
pets played a role in Russian history out of all proportion to 
its possessions. 12 

Thus it may be seen that Smolensk was the chief connecting 
link between Novgorod and Kiev along the great water road. 
Smolensk kept Novgorod and Kiev in touch with each other 
and vitally influenced the fate of both, as the details of this 
period amply testify. But it was not only on the road that ran 
north and south. It was also on the road that ran east and west, 
namely the Western Dvina-Dnieper-Moskva-Volga route. It 
was the pivot of the two great roads. (See maps 2 and 3.) 
Endowed with splendid forest resources and a key river and 
portage position, Smolensk became the center of the ancient 
Russian river-shipbuilding industry. Its boats were used at 
Novgorod and at Kiev and on the Black Sea. The greater part 
of the revenues of the princes of Smolensk came from the os- 

Golubovskii, Istoriia Smolenskoi zemli do nachala XV stoletiia (Kiev, 1895), pp. 
205-206, 261-263, 266; V. E. Rudakov, "Srnolenskaia zemlia," Entsiklopedicheskii 
slovar* (41 vols. in 82, St. Petersburg, 1890-1904; hereafter cited as Entsik. slovar'), 
XXX:*, 554. 

10 V. Kliuchevskii, Kurs Russkoi istorii (5 vols., Moscow, 1908-1921; hereafter 
cited as Kurs}, I, 208-209; Hogarth translation, History of Russia (5 vols., Lon- 
don, 191 1-193 l * hereafter cited as Hogarth tr.), 1, 97-98. 

"Solov'ev, op. cit. f I, 18. 


trogs and fortified towns which guarded the portages and trade 
routes that ran through the principality. 13 

The first Russian state based on Kiev-Novgorod, or the water 
road and its portages, came into existence late in the ninth cen- 
tury. From the tenth to the thirteenth century the water road 
remained the dominant artery of commerce in eastern Europe. 
This was in part the result of the decline, in the tenth century, 
of Baghdad and of the Khazar state in southern Russia, and 
hence of the trade route dependent upon them (the Caspian- 
Volga-Baltic axis); but of almost equal importance was the 
energetic action of such princes as Sviatoslav, who in 966 took 
Sarkel (Belaia Vezha) from the Greeks of Constantinople and 
opened the way through the lands of the Viatichi to the domi- 
nation of the middle Volga, then under the Bulgars. The ex- 
peditions of the Varangian princes against Constantinople late 
in the ninth century, and in the tenth, testify to their policy 
of keeping Constantinople from dominating the main trade 
routes of Russia, the western Dnieper route as well as the east- 
ern Volga route. 1 * 

As early as the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries events 
were taking place which heralded profound changes along the 
great water road. The Normans, and after them the Italians, 
had, during the eleventh and twelfth centuries, advanced stead- 
ily by way of the Mediterranean into the commercial domain 
of Constantinople, completing the process with the sack of that 
city by the Venetians in the Fourth Crusade (1204). Constan- 
tinople never recovered its commercial preeminence after this 
catastrophe and soon ceased to play its former role of middle- 

13 1. M. Krasnoperova, "Ocherk promyshlennosti i torgovli Smolenskago knia- 
zhestva s drevneishikh vremen do XV veka? Istoricheskoe obozrenie (St. Peters- 
burg, 1894), pp. 102-104. 

See N. Znoiko, "O pokhodakh Sviatoslava na vostokl' Zhurnal ministerstva 
narodnago prosueshcheniia (hereafter cited as Zhurnal MJVJT), ser. 2, Vol. XVIII 
(December, 1908), pp. 258-299; and A. A. Spitsyn, "Istoriko-arkheologicheskiia 
razyskaniia;' ibid., ser. 2, Vol. XIX (January, 1909), pp. 67-98; A. L. Pogodin, 
"Kievskii Vyshgorod i Gardariki;' Izvestiia otdeleniia russkago iazyka i slovesno- 
sti imperatorskoi akademii nauk, XIX (1914), bk. i. 


man between Asia and Europe. That function passed to the 
Italian cities, and the road from the Varangians to the Greeks 
declined as an international highway of commerce and was 
reduced more and more to its local possibilities. The victorious 
advance of Novgorod and Pskov against the Germans, who 
built Riga at the mouth of the Western Dvina in 1201 and 
who were beginning to penetrate the upper Western Dvina 
commercially, was checked 15 by the Russian national disaster at 
the hands of the Mongols and Tatars on the Kalka River in 1 2 2, 3 . 
In 1239 the Tatars ". . . came [from Rostov and Suzdal] and 
captured Moscow, PereiaslavF, luriev, Dmitrov, Volok [Lam- 
skii], Tver; . . . [they] besieged Torzhok . . . there was no help 
from Novgorod . . . and the pagans took Torzhok. . . . Then the 
godless pagans rushed by the Seliger route . . . killing people 
like grass, [stopping] within a hundred versts from Novgorod. 
But God saved Novgorod . . ." 16 The fall of Kiev to the same 
invaders in 1 240 sealed the fate of the southern half of the wa- 
ter road. The north-south trade route was thereby almost de- 

Two new elements now appeared on the scene, which changed 
the flow of commerce from its original north-south direction 
to an east-west orientation. The Valdai portage system was be- 
ing increasingly used by Germans from Riga and the Hanseatic 
League; and the Lithuanians began to conduct a series of raids 
into the region of the portages. (See map 2.) 

In 1229 Smolensk made with the Germans a treaty (also 
known as the Smolensk Trade Code) by which German mer- 
chants especially were to be safeguarded in making the portage 
from the Western Dvina to the Dnieper. (See App. 2.) The 
Bailiff of the Portage (to use the code after 1274), on the arrival 
of German merchants in the portage, was "to send his man 
without delay to the Portagers (Vblochane) so that they might 
transport the German merchants and the men of Smolensk 
with [their] goods [across the portage]. No one should cause 

IB Krasnoperova, op. cit., p. 84. ie &$-.#.,., Ill, 52. 


them any hindrance, because ... It may lead to a great deal of 
damage to the men of Smolensk and to the Germans at the 
hands of the pagans [i.e., the bandits and the Lithuanians]:* For 
the purpose of crossing the portage there existed a commune 
or artel of portagers (perevozchiki or volochane) who bound 
themselves under the collective guaranty of all members to be 
responsible for the property and wares of the merchants in 
transit through the portage. When the merchants arrived in 
Smolensk, the Bailiff of the Portage received gauntlets (ruka- 
vitsy perstatyperchatki) and the Princess of Smolensk a roll 
of cloth (postav polotna). Novgorod and Smolensk became 
members of the Hanseatic League, which now took the place 
of Constantinople in the trade carried on by Russia. 

The Lithuanian raiders increased their activity in the region 
of the Valdai portages in the first half of the thirteenth century. 
According to the chronicles (12231226), the following took 
place: "This winter the Novgorodians came to laroslav of Pe- 
reiaslavF asking him to accept the authority (stol) over Nov- 
gorod. . . ." Before he dismissed the ambassadors, he received 
the news: "The Lithuanians, seven thousand strong, are plan- 
ning to raid in the vicinity of Novgorod, Torzhok, Toropets, 
Smolensk, and Polotsk!' Upon hearing that, laroslav marched 
upon them with his army from PereiaslavF and caught up with 
them in the land of Polotsk at the small town of Osviacha. 
"They [the Lithuanians] made a stand . . and fought him at 
the lake. laroslav defeated them, took prisoners, and destroyed 
them. The prisoners included two thousand men; their prince 
also was seized. In this battle David, Prince of Toropets, and 
Vasilii, page of laroslav, were killed. From there, laroslav pro- 
ceeded to Novgorod and occupied the prince's seat (stol)'.' 

Many other incidents may be cited from the chronicles. The 
situation, in fact, became so serious later that Novgorod on 
several occasions had to drive the Lithuanians out of Tbropets, 
where they wished to settle, since that place controlled the por- 

17 Krasnoperova, op. cit., pp. 87-88. ES.R., XX, 154, 1, 190, III, 39. 


tages in which the great city of the north was especially in- 
terested. Under the Lithuanian prince Olgerd (i345- 1 377)' 
Toropets was finally taken; and Smolensk in 1404, by the Lith- 
uanian ruler Witovt. 10 Nearly a century later both were recov- 
ered for the Russians by the Muscovite princes, who in 147 1 had 
annexed Novgorod. However, Smolensk passed under Polish 
rule in 161 1 and was not really recovered until 1686. Thus the 
grand portage system had been under Lithuanian or Polish 
rule for nearly three centuries. By the Treaty of Nystadt (172 1) 
Peter the Great gained access to the Baltic; under Catherine II, 
by the First and Second Partitions of Poland and the Russo- 
Turkish War of 1768-1774, the road was once more Russian in 
its entirety from the Baltic to the Black Sea. The north-south 
road, however, never recovered from the catastrophes of the 
thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The economic axis of Rus- 
sia had shifted farther to the east, to the Baltic-Volga-Caspian 
water road, and the east-west route remained an important 
branch of that highway. 

An illustration of the military significance of the portage sys- 
tem of the Valdai Hills and the crossroads represented by Smo- 
lensk may be found in Napoleon's line of march to Moscow in 
iSis. 20 (See map 2.) If any attention is paid to portages, one 
finds that after the Russian armies failed to meet at Minsk, 
their further retreat and Napoleon's advance found them fac- 
ing each other on a series of seven successive portages, three to 

tbid., V, 182, III, 54-55, VIII, 17, XVI, 94, XV, 430, XI, 14, XX, 161, IV, 107, 
XI, 190. 

20 See esp. M, I. Bogdanovich, Istoriia tsarstvovaniia imperatora Aleksandra 
I i Rossii v ego vremia (6 vols., St. Petersburg, 1869-1871), III, 203-258; N. E 
Ermolov (ed.), "Zapiski generala Ermolova," Chteniia v imperatorshom ob~ 
shchestve istorii i drevnostei rossiiskikh pri moskovskom universitete (Moscow, 
1864; hereafter cited as Chteniia . . . pri moskovskom universitete), IV, 115 
282; "Zapiski grafa E. E Komarovskago," Istoricheskii vestnik, LXX (1897), 
43-69; and E. Foord, Napoleon's Campaign of 1812 (London, 1914), pp. 194197. 
For maps of the line of march see those copied from the originals belonging to 
the French Quartermaster General's Department in John Philippart, Northern 
Campaigns from the Commencement of the War in 1812 to the Armistice Signed 
and Ratified June 4, 1813 (2 vols., London, 1813). 


the west and three to the east of Smolensk, until at last at Boro- 
dinoat the entrance to the seventh portage on the road to Mos- 
cowa battle of some magnitude was fought. The first portage 
was between the Ushacha (tributary of the Western Dvina) and 
the Berezina just east of Glubokoe. The second portage was be- 
tween the Luchesa (tributary of the Western Dvina) and the 
Dnieper just east of Senno. The first Russian army retreated to 
Porech'e and Rudnia; the latter is at the portage (the third in 
the series) between the Rutoveha (tributary of the Kasplia, 
tributary of the Western Dvina) and the small Berezina (tribu- 
tary of the Dnieper). Napoleon, after crossing the Dnieper be- 
tween the second and third portages, engaged the Russians in 
a battle for Smolensk near the portage between the Krapivka 
(tributary of the Lake Kuprino river Vydra Kasplia Lake 
and River system, a tributary of the Western Dvina) and the 
Katynka (tributary of the Dnieper), the French attacking along 
the northern bank of the Dnieper. This was the fourth por- 
tage. The retreating Russians left Dorogobuzh and retired to 
Viazma, where there is a portage (the fifth in the series) be- 
tween the Viazma (tributary of the Dnieper) and the tributaries 
of the Ugra (tributary of the Oka). The Russians thereupon 
retreated through a series of minor portages from Viazma to 
Tsarevo-Zaimishche (between the tributaries of the upper Volga 
and the Oka) until they reached the significant portage (the 
sixth in the series) between the Gzhaf (a tributary of the Vazuza, 
a tributary of the Volga) and the Voria (a tributary of the Ugra, 
a tributary of the Oka). Further retreat brought them past 
Gridnevo, a village, and the Kolotskii monastery on the Kolotsa 
to Borodino (ten versts from Mozhaisk), where there is an im- 
portant portage (the seventh in the series) between the Moskva 
(tributary of the Oka) and the Protva (also tributary of the Oka) 
and where the battle which gave Napoleon access to Moscow 
was won by him. 

It was also significant that the Russian staff established its 
military food base at Vyshnii Volochek, one of the most im- 


portant portages in the entire Valdai system, and that In its re- 
treat from Moscow the Russian army stationed itself at various 
portages to the south of the capital city. 

From this account it is evident that within the portage sys- 
tem of the Baltic-Black Sea water road Smolensk and Toropets 
had been the key positions. They were equally important on 
the east-west route. Originally they both were ostrogs, just as 
were Novgorod to the north and Kiev to the south. From the 
earliest beginnings the records indicate that the continuously 
important commodities of commerce were furs from the Rus- 
sian side and textiles and metallic products from the other side. 
The life of Kievan Russia was bound up in these portages, 
ostrogs, and the fur trade. When the Russians lost the grand 
portage system in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, the 
main axis of the first Russian state was broken and the Kievan 
state on which it was founded disappeared. 

Chapter III *z Novgorod, 
Gateway to Europe and the 


VVlTH THE FALL of Kiev in 1240, Nov- 
gorod became the leading Russian city, and in spite of its dis- 
tant location in the extreme northwest of Russia it retained 
that primacy for nearly two centuries. Other Russian cities and 
principalities looked up to or envied it, for reasons which will 
be explained, while the greater part of the Russian popula- 
tion under the Mongol-Tatar yoke was gradually finding a 
new center for itself in the upper Volga basin. Novgorod suf- 
fered least from the Tatar depredations and financial exploita- 
tion. The Tatars advanced into the portage region, but whether 
on account of the swamps and the bad weather, or for some 
other reason, they never took Novgorod. The first Novgorod 
Chronicle states that in 1238 "the Tatars followed the Seliger 
route from Tbrzhok and stopped at a distance of one hundred 
versts from Novgorod!' 1 Almost at the same time (12361240) 
that Kiev succumbed to the Tatars, Novgorod had to withstand 
the attack of the Swedes on the Neva. That the Swedes knew 
what they aimed at is to be seen from the following passage in 
the first Novgorod Chronicle: 3 "The Swedes came with large 
forces in ships, also the Murmans and Sum' and Em' [They] 

X JRS-RJL., III, 52. For the history of Novgorod in general see A. I. NIkitskii, 
Istoriia ekonomicheskago byta velikago Novgoroda (Moscow, 1893). 

a JR5.JR.jL.,, Ill, 5253; confirmed for 1241, ibid,, XXIII, Ermolin Chronicle, 78; 
see also (in 1253) ibid., Ill, 55. 



stopped on the river Neva, at the mouth of the Izhora. They 
wanted to seize Ladoga, then the river [Volkhov], then Nov- 
gorod and all the lands of Novgorod. . . . Prince Alexander went 
against them with the men of Novgorod and Ladoga and de- 
feated them'/ 

The Baltic Germans had to be stopped on Lake Peipus in 
1242. This was not to be the last of the attacks from the Swedes 
and the Baltic Germans, but, once past this crisis, Novgorod 
grew into an empire as Kiev declined and as the Russian na- 
tion licked its wounds and reorganized in the Volga basin. 8 

Novgorod was a great colonizing center even in the days of 
the Kievan state. In the ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth 
centuries its wealthy boiars, hardy traders, and peasants began 
penetrating the regions around them in two directions: to the 
northeast, and to the southeast. "Rurik in Novgorod;' states 
the chronicle under the year 862, "distributed the towns among 
his men; to one he gave Polotsk, to another Rostov, to [still] 
another Beloozero . . . and the power of Rurik extended over 
all these!' This would indicate that at this early date Novgorod 
dominated the most important portages to the north, southeast, 
and west.* The region toward the northeast the basin of the 
Northern Dvina, which lay beyond the portages and forests of 
the Valdai Hills was called Zavolochie, the "Country-beyond- 
the-Portage" a word the meaning of which one must bear in 
mind if he is to understand the history of Novgorod's empire. 
The motive for the advance of traders and peasants to the north 
and northeast was chiefly the acquisition of furs by tribute or 
by trapping, and the domination of the fur trade. Tusks from 
the seacoast and silver from the Ural country were also impor- 
tant commodities. As a consequence of Novgorod's expansion 
in this direction, that city became the center of the fur trade 
of Europe. It held a virtual monopoly of furs both within its 
own territory and over those coming from any other part of 

8 Ibid., Ill, First Novgorod Chronicle, 53-54. 
4 Ibid., I, Laurentian Chronicle, 9. 




Russia. It is no exaggeration to say that, after the fall of Kiev, 
Novgorod built up an empire on furs and that this empire, 
loose and extensive as it was, was dependent upon the rivers 
and portages of the northeast which made possible the fur trade 
in the region to the south which in turn gave food to the capital. 
(See maps 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.) 

To the southeast the people of Novgorod crossed the Valdai 
Hills portages, in the region which they called the "uplands^' 
to the upper Volga country, which they called the 'lowlands!' 
Here they not only guarded certain portages, thereby control- 
ling their grain supply, but also founded towns which later 
became independent of the mother city. 

In the west, from early times the river boatmen of Novgorod, 
though inhabiting an inland region, attempted to establish 
themselves on the Baltic where pirate ships and seamen roved 
at will. In 1 188, states one among many such references in the 
chronicles, "the men of Novgorod were plundered by the Va- 
rangians in Gothland and by the Nemtsy [Germans] in Kho- 
ruzhk and in Novyi Torg [Tbrzhok], and in the spring they 
let no man of their own go beyond the sea from Novgorod, 
and gave no envoy to the Varangians, but sent them away with- 
out peace!' 5 The Novgorodians were generally unsuccessful in 
this unequal struggle. In fact, it may be said that if they traveled 
at all they usually sailed as merchants and traders on foreign 
ships on the Baltic. Participation in their own river boats was 
on a very small scale. This helps to explain why foreign-mer- 
chant quarters, especially those of the Hanseatic League (after 
its formation in the middle of the thirteenth century), played 
so important a role in the external commercial history of Nov- 
gorod. The Hansas monopolized the trade of the Baltic; Nov- 
gorod controlled that of Russia. The two met in the markets 
of Novgorod. 

But if Novgorod had many advantages on her side, there 
were also some disadvantages. Among these was weather, which 

5 Ibid., Ill, 19-20. 


was generally unfavorable to agriculture. This led to the pre- 
dominance of fur trading and fishing. The heart of the empire 
which Novgorod built up, as well as the city itself, was de- 
pendent on grain chiefly from the Dnieper region in the south 
during the Kievan period, and from the Volga country to the 
southeast during the period which followed. The vast supply 
of animals to the north and northeast gave meat in abundance, 
but agriculture did not yield enough grain and what harvest 
there was depended upon frosts which were frequently so severe 
that the price of bread went up by leaps and bounds and often 
Novgorod was on the verge of hunger, or even starvation. (See 
maps 2, 4, 6.) 

It has already been pointed out that the portages in the power 
of Smolensk between the Lovat', the Western Dvina, and the 
Dnieper controlled the bread supply in Novgorod during the 
time of the Kievan state. The portages from the Pola (an east- 
ern branch of the Lovat') and the Msta were to play a leading 
role in bread supply in the period that followed. Together with 
the portages that made possible Novgorod's expansion to the 
north and northeast, they were vital to its existence at this 
period. After creating a series of defensive rings of monasteries 
around Novgorod at a distance of from two to twelve kilo- 
meters, the Novgorodians made it a fundamental policy to 
dominate the above-mentioned portages or at least to secure 
free passage for their traders and merchants over them and the 
trade routes leading from them. This was historically the sub- 
stance of their relations with other Russian principalities. (See 
App. i, A. Volga, xxiv-xxv, xxvii-xxxii.) 

The route to the northern sea was wholly in the regions 
which were to become Novgorodian. It followed down the 

6 See A, Rado, Guide Book of the Soviet Union (New York, 1928), p. 337; I. 
Pushkarev, Ofisanie rossiiskoi imperii (St. Petersburg, 1844), I, 27-28; A. G. 
Slezskinskii, "Khutynskii monastyr' ," Istoricheskii vestnik, XCIV (1903), 926; 
ibid., "Savvo-Visherskii monastyr' " LXXXVI (1901), 270. The role of monasteries 
in Russian history other than in their religious functions offers a wide oppor- 
tunity for research. Here the purpose has been merely to indicate their military 
functions as ostrogs, i.e., as fortifications. See App. 5, below. 






Volkhov from Novgorod into Lake Ladoga and from that lake 
to Lake Onego on the Svir' River. (See App. i, I. Onega, i, vii.) 
From Lake Onego the fur trader or trapper went up the Vodlia, 
across the portage to Lake Kenozero, then along the Kena and 
Onega rivers to Lake Emetskoe, then down the river Emtsa 
into the lower Northern Dvina. From there one could descend 
to the White Sea or continue eastward along the Pinega and 
portage to the Kuloi and then reach the sea once more. There- 
after he could ascend the river Mezen, then its tributary the 
Peza, portage to the Chirka, and then go down the Tsilma, a 
tributary of the Pechora. (See App. i, K. Pechora, i, vii.) One 
could then sail up the Pechora to the Usa, up the lisa to its 
tributary the Elets, portage across the Urals, and sail down 
the river Sob', a tributary of the Ob* in Siberia. A sea route to 
.the Ob' beginning at the mouths of either the Northern Dvina, 
the Mezen, or the Pechora led through the channel between 
Vaigach Island and the mainland to the lal-Mal peninsula. 
Here the river Mutnaia was ascended; a portage crossed to the 
river Zelenaia before the Ob' was reached. Thus it may be seen 
that not only all the north coastal region, but even Siberia, was 
accessible by lake, river, and portage. (See maps 4, 5.) 

To reach Siberia, however, the more inland route doubtless 
became the desirable one because it was physically less difficult. 
This inland route to Siberia was reached by turning south from 
Lake Onego up the Vytegra River and portaging to the Kovzha, 
which flows into Lake Beloe (Beloozero). From this lake the 
road lay down the Sheksna and by portage and lakes near by 
into the Porozovitsa and then into Lake Kubenskoe. Here the 
Sukhona, a tributary of the Northern Dvina, takes its origin. 
Flowing east, the Sukhona empties into the Northern Dvina 
at a point near where the Vychegda empties into the same river. 
By following eastward up the Vychegda and then up its tribu- 
tary, the Nem, a portage to the Visherka is reached. The latter 
is a tributary of the Kolva, which in turn is a tributary of the 
Kama. A portage from the Visherka leads to the Volosnitsa, a 


tributary of the Pechora. The road then leads down the Pechora 
and up its tributary the Shchugor. Here there is a portage across 
the Urals which leads by the Vol'ia or latriia tributaries of the 
Sosva to the Ob' in Siberia. (See App. i, A. Volga, xxxii, xxxiv, 
lii, liii; K. Pechora, vi.) 

Thus we see the northern route divided into the lateral west- 
east routes along the coast and inland. 

It has been indicated that the inland route to Zavolochie, the 
"Country-beyond-the-Portager turned south from Lake Onego 
to the Sheksna and then east through Lake Kubenskoe and 
down the Sukhona. It was at this point that the portages over 
the Valdai Hills joined it. This region of the Sheksna, Lake 
Beloe (Beloozero), and Lake Kubenskoe, dominated by the 
town of Vologda, was a crossroads of great significance since 
streams of immigrants and traders moving north and east from 
the Volga country met here with those moving northeast and 
east from Novgorod. (See map 5.) Another route, the one along 
the Volga and the Kama the great highway to Siberia, was 
then in the hands of the Tatars. This route to Siberia from the 
upper Volga region was closed to the Russians until the six- 
teenth century. (See map 4.) 

Such indeed were the main river highways and portages 
which the merchants, fur-tribute collectors, and trappers of 
Novgorod used either singly or in companies (vatagi). The 
process of gaining domination over this vast territory with such 
small groups of men was much the same in this region as in 
the one previously studied: the domination of successive river 
basins by the control of the portages between them, the speed 
of the expansion being determined by the exhaustion o fur- 
bearing animals in each successive basin. In each case, however, 
the raiding of a basin preceded this development until its stra- 
tegic control was established. In the district o the Urals (which 
came to be known as lugria) the raiding policy never ended, 
because the Novgorodians never succeeded in securing domina- 
tion there. 


From the middle of the thirteenth century it is possible to 
state positively just what constituted the Novgorod empire, be- 
cause beginning in 1265 treaties with Tver enumerate its ter- 
ritories as including Vologda, Zavolochie, Tre, Perm, Pechora, 
and lugria. 7 Beginning about this time and for nearly two hun- 
dred years thereafter Novgorod probably enjoyed, even if at 
times precariously, its greatest prosperity. 

We are now ready to turn our attention to the portages from 
the Novgorod-Ilmen Lake region into the Volga basin. These 
were decisive in Novgorod's existence: they had become keys 
to the routes bringing grain to the city, and at the same time 
were a challenge to Novgorod's northern fur empire from the 
Volga region along the inland route described above. Illus- 
trations of this are very frequent in the chronicles. In 1272 a 
brother, Vasilii, and a son, Dmitrii, of Alexander Nevskii com- 
peted for the princely throne of Novgorod. ". . , Prince Vasilii 
came to "Tbrzhok and burned the dwellings and installed his 
own Bailiff of the Portage (Tiun) and went back to Kostroma. 
And Sviatoslav with the men of Tver began to ravage the Nov- 
gorod districts: Volokolamsk, Bezhitsy, and Vologda. Bread was 
dear in Novgorod. . . ." 8 And again in 1312, "Prince Mikhail of 
Tver quarreled with Novgorod and withdrew his officials and 
cut off the grain from Novgorod. ... he occupied Torzhok and 
Bezhitsy and the entire district. And in the spring when the 
roads were bad, the Vladyka [bishop] David went to Tver and 
concluded a peace; the Prince opened the gates and sent his 
officials into Novgorod. . . ." 9 

In 1445, Prince Boris of Tver seized fifty Novgorod districts, 
ravaging Bezhitsy and the country about Torzhok, and he took 

7 S.G.G. i D. f I, i; see also I. V. Shcheglov, Khronologicheskii perechen' va~ 
zhneishikh dannykh iz istorii Sibiri, 1032-1882 (Irkutsk, 1883), p. 7. 

8 P.S.R.L. f III, 62-63; The Chronicle of Novgorod, 1016-1431 (London, 1914, 
translated from the Russian by Robert Michell and Nevill Forbes; hereafter 
cited as Michell and Forbes), p. 106; A* E. Presniakov, Obrazovanie velikorus- 
skago gosudarstva (Petrograd, 1918), pp. 78-79. 

9 JRSJRX., III, 70; Michell and Forbes, p. 118. 


Torzhok. ". . . Bread was dear in Novgorod, and not only this 
year but during ten whole years " 10 

To those who lived in the Volga basin the control of these 
portages meant access to the Baltic and to the Arctic-to com- 
merce with Europe and to the fur empire. 

The two portages of outstanding importance in this connec- 
tion for Novgorod were: first, Vyshnil Volochek (Upper Little 
Portage), between the Msta, which flowed into Lake Ilmen, and 
the Tvertsa, which flowed into the Volga; and second, the Por- 
tage of the Lama (Volok Lamskii), also known as The Portage 
( Volok). (See maps 2 and 6.) The former gave access to the upper 
Volga, the latter to the lower Volga. The latter could be reached 
from Novgorod by several routes; its chief advantage was that 
it could be reached, if Tver blocked the Msta-Tvertsa route, 
by going up the Pola from Lake Ilmen, portaging to Lake 
Seliger, and sailing down the Selizharovka to the Volga or from 
the Pola directly by portage to the source lakes of the Volga 
and then down the Volga to the Derzha, portaging to the Ruza 
near Volokolamsk and following that river to the Moskva River 
and on to the Oka and again to the Volga. Alternately, the For 
tage of the Lama could be reached from the Msta by portaging 
eastward to the Mologa on which stood the important ostrog 
or fortified center of Bezhitsy and then up the Volga to the 
Shosha, up the Shosha to the Lama, from which the portage 
takes its name, and then to the Ruza or Istra into the Moskva, 
the Oka, and the Volga again. (See App. i, A. Volga, x-xii, 

These two routes through the Valdai Hills avoid the mouth 
of the Tvertsa (at the Volga) where, in 1 137, the town of Tver 
was built. This town became the northern outpost of the re- 
gion south of the Valdai Hills portages. After crossing the 
Msta-Tvertsa portage from the north, the ostrog of Torzhok is 
reached. (See map 2.) This became Novgorod's guaranty that 
the portage should belong to her. Before the town of Tver was 
10 RS.RJL., IV, 124; Michell and Forbes, pp. 01-304. 


built, the passage into the Volga from this portage was open; 
after that, good relations between Novgorod and the princes 
of the Volga, especially those of Tver, determined whether ac- 
cess to the Volga along this route would be easy. On the other 
hand, there were numerous attacks by the Volga princes on, 
Torzhok, which the Novgorodians regarded almost as sacred as 
their own city. It was burned or destroyed many times, but as 
long as Novgorod was independent, Novgorod always rebuilt 
it and reestablished its control there. 

Novgorod could expect to maintain itself only so long as 
Smolensk and Suzdal, and Tver and Moscow, were at odds 
with each other long enough to allow her grain supply to come 
through, or as long as Suzdal, Rostov, and Moscow in the Volga 
basin did not take it upon themselves to extend their territories 
north into the fur empire after their inhabitants began to emi- 
grate into that region. Once either of these matters should be- 
come a point of policy, Novgorod's doom would be sealed. The 
routes would be cut, the portages seized, and Novgorod an- 
nexed. If it was true that Novgorod had to be on good terms 
with Smolensk in the Kievan period, it was now true that that 
city had to be on good terms first with Suzdal (before Tver 
dominated the Tvertsa region), then with Tver, and finally 
with Moscow. 

When Moscow emerged as the dominant power in the Volga 
region in the fifteenth century, it could not avoid an interest in 
the direct trade with Europe, which passed through Novgorod 
and its portages to the Baltic, nor in the chief raw materials of 
that trade in the fur empire to the north and northeast. Mos- 
cow also looked forward to the end of Tatar domination of the 
lower Volga-Caspian trade route and the markets of central 
Asia and beyond. It was this Baltic-Volga-Caspian trade route 
that was to form the axis of the new Muscovite state. Land- 
locked Moscow's future on the middle course of this route was 
either suffocation or domination of the rivers and portages 
from sea to sea. 



It must not be supposed that the fur empire o Novgorod was 
a closely knit, firm state organization. Stretching out over a 
vast area, with points of defense and domination chiefly at stra- 
tegic localities amidst hostile Finnish tribes, it was thinly pop- 
ulated by Novgorodians and Volga Russians. This was also a 
population in motion most of the time. The empire consisted 
of ostrogs and monasteries at portages and key points of the 
river basins. (See Apps. i, 5.) The Novgorodians levied a trib- 
ute of furs on the inhabitants. The raids of the Novgorodians 
became a regular policy, both for the exaction of tribute and 
for keeping interlopers from the Volga and the Kama country 
from approaching the northeast. 11 Because Novgorod lacked 
mass population with which to settle intensively the country 
thus opened up, and because of the raiding policy, no solid 
imperialism could be established over this region. lugria, or 
the Ural country, was never held as a country, but was a terri- 
tory into which raids were made and where tribute was col- 
lected from inhabitants living in the fear of raids. But there 
were expeditions sent out by Novgorod that did not return 
victorious from these raids. 13 Over most of the distant northeast 
country Novgorod exercised rather a sphere of influence than 
the actual sovereignty of a state. 

., Ill, 79 (1340), 81-82 (1342), 88 (1366), IV, 66 (1369), 7*~72 (*375) 
XI, 126 (1390), IV, 102-103 (1398); also III, 98-100, no; see also M. Berezhkov, 
"O torgovle Rusi s Ganzoi do kontsa XV vekaj' Zapiski istoriko-filologicheskago 
fakul'teta imperatorskago s.-peterburgskago uriiversiteta, Part III (St. Petersburg, 
l8 7 8 ) P- 44 who indicates that the river raids from 1359 to 1409 were often 
large-scale enterprises. 

13 See P.S.R.L., III, 21-22; Michell and Forbes, op. cit., pp. 36-37; P.S.R.L., III, 
73, 74,1V, 124- 

IV x Pivot 

of Eurasian Empire 

JLHE HISTORY of Moscow is the story of 
how an insignificant ostrog became the capital of a Eurasian 
empire. This insignificant ostrog, built in the first half of the 
twelfth century, on an insignificant river by an insignificant 
princeling, became, in the course of time, the pivot of an em- 
pire extending into two, and even three, continents. 

Moscow's strategic position. As the Kievan state declined 
and finally collapsed, a large part of the Russian population 
migrated into the Mezhduriechie the Russian Mesopotamia- 
formed by the upper Volga and the Oka, which flows into the 
Volga lower down. Moscow found Itself on the Moskva River, 
which flows into the Oka. It was, therefore, in the heart of the 
Russian Mesopotamia. (See maps 2 and 6.) It was at the center 
of the portages and rivers in this upper Volga basin, with direct 
access to the Volga on the north, east, and south, and to the 
Dnieper and Western Dvina on the west. To the north, por- 
tages from the Moskva and its tributaries led to the Lama 
through Volokolamsk and down that river and the Shosha to 
the Volga and to the Derzha, a tributary of the Volga. To the 
east, portages from the Skhodnia and lauza, tributaries of the 
Moskva, led the boatmen to the Kliazma, a tributary of the 
Oka, in turn a tributary of the Volga. This led to the Caspian. 
It should be noted here that from the Volga one could reach 
Zavolochie to the north and Siberia to the east. A more south- 
ern route led by portage from the Moskva to the Protva, or 
from the Fakhra tributary of the Moskva to the Lopasnia, both 


of which joined the Oka; and that in turn by other portages led 
to the Don, the Dnieper, and the Black Sea. To the west, por- 
tages from the Moskva opened the road through the Volga trib- 
utaries, the Gzhat' and Vazuza, to the Dnieper and the Western 
Dvina. These in turn connected Moscow by water with the 
grand portage system of the Valdai Hills and hence gave access 
to the Baltic as well as the Black Sea. Moscow, therefore, could 
reach by portage all the river systems of the vast territory that 
became the Russian empire. 1 It was the crossroads of two great 
waterways and trunk lines of trade, the Caspian-Baltic axis o 
rivers and portages, and the west-east route from the Western 
Dvina to the Volga. It was more centrally situated than any 
capital of a Russian state before or after Kievan, Novgorodian, 
or Petrine and hence it was the natural pivot of the Eurasian 
empire which the Russians founded. The transfer of the capital 
from St. Petersburg (Leningrad) to Moscow under the Soviet 
rule was, among other things, a recognition of this fundamental 
fact. (See App. i, A. Volga, v-xxviii.) 

The rise of Moscow to domination of the upper and middle 
Volga basin. The feudal or appanage period in the Volga sys- 
tem which followed the decline and collapse of the Kievan 
state in the thirteenth century was, in large part, a struggle 
to dominate the basins and portages of that river and its tribu- 
taries. To bring these together mealit political unity and domi- 
nation. A glimpse of what such a development might mean is 
given when, in 1469, "Grand Prince Ivan [III, of Moscow] sent 
his army on boats into the Kazan region. . . . [Some Muscovites] 
went on the Moskva River to Nizhnii Novgorod; other [Mus- 
covites] went by way of the Kliazma. The men of Kolomna, 
and all those living along the Oka above them, went down the 
Oka. Those from Murom did likewise. The men from Vladimir 
and Suzdal went down the Kliazma. Those from Dmitrov and 

a For some observations on this subject see Ivan Zabelin, Istoriia goroda 
Moskvy (Moscow, 1904), pp. 1-21; Khodakovskii, op. cit ff passim; and Barsov, 
op. cit., pp. 23, 29-30, 43, 51, 171-172, 188-189, 196, 252, 258-262. 


Mozhaisk and Uglich, from laroslavl and Rostov, from Kos- 
troma and the others in the Volga region, came down the Volga, 
arriving at [Nizhnii] Novgorod at the same time!' 2 

Moscow was founded certainly by the last quarter of the 
twelfth century by the princes of Suzdal-Vladimir, in all prob- 
ability as a military base or outpost against the south. Soon it 
began to acquire another significance. 3 Like others in this re- 
gion, the minor principality of Moscow engaged in the business 
of "gathering together" pieces of territory here and there. Not 
long after it began to rise in importance, a "definite plan;' so 
to speak, emerges. 4 First, it appears, the entire Moskva River 
was dominated in 1301 by the seizure of Mozhaisk at its source, 
and Kolomna, where it empties into the Oka. These "in the 
future served as bases for Muscovite expeditions against Smo- 
lensk on one side and toward the Oka and Volga regions on 
the other!' 5 It soon became evident that the acquisition of the 
Moskva River, with its customs duties at Mozhaisk and Ko- 
lomna, had a real commercial and financial significance. 6 Next, 
the Kliazma was obtained by the absorption of the suzerain 
province of Vladimir. There followed other accretions of ter- 
ritory on the upper Volga and Oka until Tver 7 on the Volga and 
Riazan on the Oka were almost surrounded. When Nizhnii 
Novgorod on the middle Volga was acquired in 1394, Moscow 
virtually dominated the trade of that river. (See map 6.) 

2 Nikon's Chronicle, HSJRX V XII, 121. 

3 S. E Platonov, "O nachale MoskvyJ' Bibliograf (1890), bks. 5-6, argues, and 
A. E. Presniakov, op. cit., p. 115, accepts the view, that Moscow was not orig- 
inally a commercial center, but the outpost or base of operations of the Prince 
of Suzdal -Vladimir against the south. The weight of evidence is in that direction, 
and this view is accepted by the present writer. 

*Kliuchevskii, Kurs, II, 16-17 (Hogarth tr., I, 283), asks if this is not a definite 
policy a river policy. The answer appears clearly to be in the aflirmative. 
Illustrations are to be found in the wills of the princes of Moscow. Presniakov, 
op. tit., pp. 165, 170-171, 172, i75~i7 6 - 

5 Presniakov, op. cit,, pp. 118-119. 

*S,G.G. z"Z>.,I,39, 59-61. 

tRS.RJL., VII, 188, illustrates how Prince lurii of Moscow summoned Nov- 
gorod, which had sufficient reasons to oppose Tver, to assemble at Torzhok, 
while he established his camp at Volokolamsk. lurii, however, was not successful 
in this campaign. 


The northern affluent of the Volga, the Kostroma, gave ac- 
cess by portage to Zavolochie, the Northern Dvina country, 
the already mentioned "Country-beyond-the-Portage," includ- 
ing especially Vologda and Totma, formerly Novgorodian col- 
onies, now fast becoming independent, and Velikii Ustiug. 
They, in turn, opened up a road to raw materials of great 
wealth for that day, furs and silver, then in the domain of 
Novgorod. In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries minor 
princes, their retainers, and peasants from the upper Volga 
country made their way up the Mologa and Sheksna, northern 
tributaries of the Volga, and into the Lake Beloe (Beloozero) 
country. At the same time, monasteries in that locality were 
founded by monks from the Volga region. In this strategic tri- 
angle (see maps 5, 4, 7), cutting across the inland Novgorod 
route into the Northern Dvina country, a long and bitter strug- 
gle was waged over access to the Vologda country and the Su- 
khona, a tributary of the Northern Dvina, one of the highways 
to the Arctic Ocean and Siberia, as indicated above. (See App. 
i, J. Northern Dvina, i-xxiv.) Here the Novgorod and Volga 
governments (which meant Moscow in the first half of the 
fifteenth century), the Novgorod and Volga monasteries and 
churches, and the Novgorod and Volga populations fought it 
out. 8 The chronicles give much testimony on the subject. Nov- 
gorod's canoe men (ushkuiniki), sometimes called the "Braves 
of Novgorod," raided along the Volga, especially from 1369 
to 1450, in an attempt to prevent the supremacy of the Volga 
country along this great inland highway the Northern Dvina. 
Slowly, stubbornly, and with decisive force when Moscow as- 
sumed the leadership, the line advanced from the portages be- 
tween the Kostroma and the Sukhona to the next watershed 
northward, between the Sukhona and the Vaga. In this way 
Vologda, Totma, and Velikii Ustiug, gradually filled by Volga 
immigrants, became, first, independent of Novgorod, and then, 

8 For the pre-Tatar and Tatar period see Presniakov, op. dt., pp. 36-39, 48-51, 
80-81, 138-139. The Tatars opposed the union of the Volga countries and 


in the first half of the fifteenth century, allies of Moscow. Thus 
Moscow opened up the road to the fur empire, to the Arctic, 
and to Siberia. 9 

Moscow's domination of the Caspian-Baltic sea axis. Mos- 
cow held the gateway to the lower Volga and the trade of Asia, 
particularly in silk, at Nizhnii-Novgorod from the time of its 
acquisition in 1394. After the disintegration of the Golden 
Horde, the Tatar Khanate of Kazan, which dominated the lower 
Volga, proved a new and powerful factor. 10 Barred from the 
Caspian by Kazan and from the Baltic by Novgorod, Moscow, 
the ruler of the middle and upper Volga, was faced with the 
alternative of suffocation or of forging her way out to both seas. 
Should she make her way out, she would dominate a part of 
the silk trade of Asia and obtain a virtual monopoly of the fur 
trade of Europe. 31 

It is not difficult to see in which direction Moscow would act 
first, since a breach had already been made into the fur empire 
of Novgorod. 13 Acquisition of the northeastern part of the Val- 
dai Hills portage would give access to the Baltic. Long had the 
princes of the Volga region yearned to do this! As far back as 
the twelfth century and in the two centuries which followed, 
the aspiration was there and frequent attempts were made to 
bring Novgorod under the domination of the Volga princes. 
The chronicles are full of these incidents. 13 Lithuania was in 
control of the southwestern half of the Valdai Hills portage 

9 S. E Platonov, Proshloe russkogo severa (St. Petersburg, 1923), pp. 7-10; A. A. 
Kizevetter, Russkii sever (Vologda, 1919), pp. 12-40; Kliuchevskii, Kurs, II, 313- 


10 See Presniakov, op. cit., pp. 397-399, which ably describes the effect upon 
Moscow of the establishment of the Khanate of Kazan. It caused Moscow to 
hurry the subjugation of Novgorod the Great. 

11 S. E Platonov, op. ctt.., pp. 20-36; Theodor Schiemann, Russland f Polen und 
Livland bis ins 17. Jahrhundert (Berlin, 1886-1887), I, 285; Presniakov, op. cit., 
pp. 277-282. 

12 L. K. Goetz, Deutsch-russische Handehgeschichte des Mittelalters (Liibeck, 
1922), p. 9. 

^P.S.R.L. 3 III, 91-92, 98-102, 106-107, 113, IV, 91-94, 99-103, 115-116, XI, 155; 
also Presniakov, op. cit., pp. 143-146. 


system. As already indicated, it held Smolensk, Toropets, and 
all portages from the Western Dvina to the Dnieper and from 
the Dnieper to the Volga system. In the past, Novgorod could 
always lean on Lithuania if the Volga princes became too ag- 
gressive, and on the Volga princes if Lithuania threatened, as 
she did on numerous occasions, to absorb Novgorod. Actually 
the latter at times paid tribute to both sides. But it was a dan- 
gerous game, which she finally lost. 

The struggle between Moscow and Novgorod, which cul- 
minated in 147 1-1478, was fundamentally one of raw materials 
and highways, that is, furs, river systems, and portages. For 
Moscow it meant empire and a new Russian national develop- 
ment, or disintegration. For Novgorod it meant either Mus- 
covite or Lithuanian domination. 

When Orthodox Novgorod signed a treaty acknowledging 
as her overlord Roman Christian Lithuania, which held Smo- 
lensk and Ibropets and hoped to acquire Torzhok, Bezhitsy, and 
the remaining strategic points in the Valdai Hills portage sys- 
tem (see map 2), the able but unscrupulous Muscovite princes 
could rouse up Russian national feeling in its religious and 
racial aspects throughout all Russia. And this is what Ivan 
(III) the Great did when he suddenly carried out the subjuga- 
tion of Novgorod in 1471 and effected its complete absorption 
by 1478. Otherwise, Lithuania would have blocked Moscow 
from these regions and possibly even conquered Moscow, for 
the control of the entire Valdai Hills portage system would have 
given Lithuania decisive advantages over Moscow. 

For our purposes it is interesting to note that the Muscovite 
campaign of 1471 included certain river and portage factors. 
(See map 2.) The main army of Ivan III, concentrating at Volo- 
kolamsk, proceeded by way of Torzhok and Vyshnii Volochek 
into the Novgorod country; in other words, through two por- 
tages and on connecting rivers. Next, we hear of the army near 
Lake Valdai (at the village of lazholbitse), although we do not 
know how it got there, whether by land or water. From there it 


went to Rusa. One of the Muscovite armies was sent .originally 
against Rusa (by what route we do not know), and finally it 
was ordered to join the army of Pskov on the Shelon' River 
(probably at or near the portage from the Cherekha to the 
Uza, a tributary of the Shelon'). Here on the Shelon' River was 
fought the battle which decided the fate of Novgorod proper. 14 

At the same time that this campaign in Novgorod proper 
took place, Ivan III ordered his military commanders (voevo- 
das) Obrastsov and Slepets at Ustiug to take the forces stationed 
there and at Viatka and proceed by boat to the Northern Dvina 
country. (See map 5.) "On the River Shilenga" so reports the 
chronicle, "they were met by Prince Vasilii Vasilievich Shuiskii 
with the military commander of the Dvina and a strong force 
of men from the Dvina country. There followed a terrible 
battle . . . ; the Novgorodians were defeated and fled to Nov- 
gorod'/ 15 Thus, in this medieval blitzkrieg, Moscow first starved 
Novgorod (by seizing Torzhok) and then with lightning strokes 
subdued her on the Shelon' and Northern Dvina. A rising of 
the Novgorod population followed the cutting off of grain sup- 
plies and completed the military victory. 16 With one stroke Mos- 
cow won access to the Baltic and White seas and the entire fur 
empire to the north and east. In 1485 Tver, now wholly sur- 
rounded by Muscovite territory, was absorbed by Moscow. 17 

The Baltic-Caspian axis of the new Muscovite state was ad- 
vanced a step farther when Kazan and the lower Volga were 
annexed in 1552 by Ivan (IV) the Terrible, who had previously 
occupied the important fords across the rivers which led to 
Kazan, 18 and built the ostrog of Sviiazhsk In 1551 as a base 
against that strategic stronghold. 

14 Solov'ev, op. cit. y I, 1361-1364. 

15 A. A. Titov (ed.), Letopis' velikoustiuzhskaia, po Braginskomu spisku (Mos- 
cow, 1903), p. 4. 

18 Kliuchevskii, Kurs, I, 364. 
1T P.S.R.L., VIII, 216-217. 

Ibid., XIII, 166, 177, 198-203; see esp. the Kazan Chronicle, ibid., XIX, 
34-36, 62, 71, 104, 114, 126, 304, 325. 


The Livonian War (1558-1583) of Ivan the Terrible was an 
attempt to acquire for Muscovite Russia a foothold on the 
Baltic, in other words, direct access to the sea. It was a con- 
tinuation of the struggle between the Swedes and Germans (as 
well as the Lithuanians) on one side, and the Russians on the 
other a struggle which, so far as it pertains to the Swedes, be- 
gan in 1240 when Prince Alexander of Novgorod defeated 
them on the Neva and ended in 1721 when Peter the Great 
concluded in triumph the Peace of Nystadt. 19 

In this struggle the Swedes, seeking at least the commercial, 
if not always the political, control of the Baltic Sea and north- 
ern Russia, aimed to eliminate Russia from the Baltic and to 
secure themselves against the rising power of Russia by obtain- 
ing certain strategic points and rivers. Among these was the 
fortified city of Narva, which, subject to one condition, com- 
manded the road to Pskov up the Narova River, and the way 
up the Luga River with a portage to the Mshaga River, which 
empties into Lake Ilmen, on which Novgorod is to be found. 
That condition was Swedish command of Ivangorod, 20 which 
the Russians had built in 1491. The way into the Valdai por- 
tage system from the northwest would thus be opened up. 

Then there was the Neva River, which flowed from Lake La- 
doga to the Gulf of Finland. The river itself was controlled at 
Lake Ladoga by the ostrog of Oreshek, built by the Russians 

19 For the best accounts of this see esp. G. V. Forsten, "Bor'ba iz-za gospodstva 
na Baltiiskom more v XV i XVI stoletiiakhr Zapiski istoriko-^lologicheskago 
fakul'teta s.-peterburgskago universiteta (St. Petersburg, 1884), XIV; idem, "Bal- 
tiiskii vopros v XVI I XVII stoletiiakh (1544-1648)7 2 vols., in Zapiski, XXXIII- 
XXXIV (St. Petersburg, 1893-1894); idem, "Akty I pisraa k istorii baltiiskago 
voprosa v XVI i XVII stoletiiakh," 2 vols., in Zapiski (St. Petersburg, 1889-1893); 
also idem, "Politika Shvetsii v smutnoe vremia," Zhurnal M.N.R (St. Petersburg, 
1889), CGLXI, 325-349, CCLXV, 185-213, CCLXVI, 17-65; H. Almquist, Sverge 
och Ryssland, 1595-1611 (Uppsala, 1907); idem, "Die Carenwahl des Jahrcs 
1613? Zeitschrift fur osteuropaische Geschichte, III (Berlin, 19x3), 161-202; 
Generalstaben, Sveriges krig (/dr 1-76)2), I, Dansk och Ryska JKrigen (Stock- 
holm, 1936); G. G, Styffe (ed.), Konung Gustaf II Adolfs Skrifter (Stockholm, 
1861); J. Hallenberg, Svea rikes historia under konung Gustaf Adolf den Stores 
regering (4 vols,, Stockholm, 1790-1796). 

^Forsten, "Bor'ba . , . ," pp, 151-153. 


In I322, 21 which later was called Noteburg by the Swedes and 
Schliisselburg by Peter I, and at the place where it emptied into 
the Gulf of Finland by Nienshants/ 2 virtually on the site of 
St. Petersburg. Nienshants was built by the Swedes in 1300, 
seized and destroyed by the Russians in 1301, and rebuilt by 
the Swedes in 1609. The Neva River was for the Russians their 
direct way of access to the sea; for the Swedes it was a highway 
into all northern Russia. The Volkhov River flows from Lake 
Ilmen, on which Novgorod stands, into Lake Ladoga; at its 
mouth was built the ostrog of Ladoga. The Volkhov, Lake La- 
doga, and the Neva together constituted the chief highway of 
Novgorod to the sea. (See map 4.) Lake Ladoga, in addition, 
gave access by river, lake, and portage to all northern and north- 
eastern Russia, as has already been pointed out. Viborg, in 
which the Swedes first established themselves at the end of the 
thirteenth century, was probably useful for two reasons: (i) as 
a base for the control of the eastern end of the Gulf of Finland, 
and (2) for access to Lake Ladoga through the Karelian Lakes 
system in the period when the Swedes did not dominate the 
Neva. In the hands of the Swedes it also blocked a possible 
Russian advance into Finland. 

In the fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries the 
Swedes tried to gain possession of Oreshek, the Russians to 
acquire Viborg. 23 The Livonian War ended in 1583 to the dis- 
advantage of the Russians, with the acceptance* of Swedish 
domination of Baltic Esthonia and Swedish possession of Narva, 
in Esthonia, and Ivangorod, lama (later called lamburg), and 
Kopor'e, as well as Kexholm on Lake Ladoga in Karelia, all in 
Novgorod territory. Kexholm probably assured Swedish access 
from the Gulf of Finland through the Karelian Lakes to Lake 

a "Russko-shvedskiia voinyj' Entsik. slovar'., XXVII: i, 343-344. 

22 Also called Nishants, Shants-Ter'nien, Landeskron, Nyenskans, Nyenshantz, 
or Neivaschanze, Nevalinna, Skanz ter Nyen, Kantsve, Novyi Kantsy. See A. 
Shchekatov, Slovar* geograftcheskii rossiiskago gosudarstva, IV, 663-664, and 
Entsik. Slovak, XIII: i, 213. 

23 Entsik. sloven*, XXVII: i, 343-344; Forsten, "Bor'ba . . . ," pp. 156-161; idem, 
Baltiiskii vopros . . . , I, passim. 


Ladoga. With Narva, Ivangorod, lama, Kopor'e, Viborg ; and 
Kexholm in Swedish hands, the rising power of the north was 
closing in on Russia. 24 

There remained the control o the easiest line of communi- 
cation between the Gulf of Finland and Lake Ladoga the river 
Neva. Opportunity for the Swedes to gain this control (i.e., 
through Nienshants and Oreshek) came with Russia's "Time 
of Troubles," especially after 1604, when the Poles sought to 
dominate Russia. The Swedes intervened as allies, prompted 
by their fear of Polish domination of Russia. They took advan- 
tage of the virtual collapse of that country and of its desire for 
aid from Sweden against Poland by demanding occupation of 
these important river bases as guaranties of future payment for 
their services. In one or two instances they obtained these ad- 
vantages by fraud, became involved in war with the Russians 
over them, and obtained a peace (1617) which gave them all 
that they had demanded for their services with the exception 
of Novgorod. 

To show that the Swedes had a keen sense of the value and 
significance of the rivers, portages, ostrogs, and fur trade it is 
only necessary to mention a few details. In 1609 the Swedes 
rebuilt Nienshants 25 at the mouth of the Neva. That same year, 
in a treaty between Skopin-Shuiskii and the Swedes, the Rus- 
sians surrendered Kexholm in return for the sending of Swed- 
ish troops fromTorzhok to Koliazin at the junction of the Volga 
and the Zhabka; 28 this actually put the Swedes in domination 
of the northern half o the Valdai portage system, while the 
Polish king, Sigismund III, was demanding the surrender of 
Smolensk, the key to the southern half of this system. 2 * Two 
years later, the Novgorodians, by treaty with Jacob de la Gardie, 
commander of the Swedish troops, or by the strategem of the 
latter, surrendered the key fortifications of Novgorod and the 

^Solov'ev, op. cit., VI, 282-292; Forsten, Baltnskii vopros . . . , I, 699-715. 
25 Entsik. slovar', XIII: i, 53. 
2 5.G.G. i Z>., II, 374, 575-383. 
w Ibid,, II, 504-506. 


ostrogs of Oreshek and Ladoga. 28 In 161 1, therefore, the Swedes 
actually dominated the Russian north they had all the keys 
in their hands. As a result of hostilities which broke out be- 
tween the Swedes and the Russians in 1613 in the region of 
Tikhvin and of Bezhitsy strategic centers of great importance 
for access to the northern regionsthe fictitious relationship 
of Swedish "allies" became that of Swedish enemies. 29 In 1617 
at Stolbovo a peace was signed giving Sweden all she had de- 
manded with the exception of Novgorod, to which from the 
north the Swedes held all the points of access. (See map 8.) 

All this is best described in the words of Gustavus Adolphus, 
who, in his speech before the Riksdag at Orebro on January 28, 
1617, said: 80 

The chief reason for the slowness of procedure [i.e., in making 
peace with the Russians] has been that they have been unwilling 
to grant us our rights and an indemnity. It was absolutely impos- 
sible to obtain the seventy barrels of gold we asked for at Dedrina 
[Dederin]. The [Russian] offer of forty barrels, which the mediators 
considered reasonable, was regarded [by the Swedes] as intolerable. 
Iwanogrod [Ivangorod], Jama [lama], Copori [Kopor'e], Noteborg 
[Oreshek], and Kexholm, with their land and provinces, were very 
dear to the Russians, but no peace could be established without 
the fulfillment of one of the two demands. Otherwise a settlement 
would have been altogether too far removed from the suggestion 
given me by Your Highnesses [lords] and you [commons] at the last 
meeting of the Estates. If the offer had been accepted, it would have 
brought shame and dishonor upon our fatherland and myself, and 
would have led to the greatest insecurity in the future. For what 
could have been more humiliating than to have accepted 110,000 
riksdaler, which would not have been, enough to pay even half of 
the soldiers' wages, and then return nine well-fortified cities and 

28 Ibid., II, 553-555. See also Almquist, Sverge och Ryssland, pp. 105-268; idem, 
"Die Carenwahl des Jahres 1613" pp. 161-202. 

MRS.R.L., Ill, 307-308; also see Entsik. slovaf for Borovitskii monastery 
(IV: i, 429) and Vvedenskii monastery (XXXIII: i, 280); Generalstaben, Sveriges 
krig (1611-1632), I, 318-572. 

80 See Styffe, op. cit., pp. 140-143, 179-187, as translated by Peter Gulbrandsen 
and revised by Albin T. Anderson. This has been paraphrased and quoted by 
Forsten, "Politika Shvetsii , . . ," pp. 31-33. 


castles, together with the land and fiefs belonging to them, which 
I now rightfully own? For it would then have seemed as if we Swedes 
had been subdued by the Russians, or that we were exhausted, or 
that I, as Sweden's king, had been so pusillanimous that I was afraid 


of trusting God to lead and help my just cause to a successful con- 
clusion. All that would have been no little humiliation. And be- 
sides, what guaranties would we have had from the enemy, who 
rarely keeps his word and whose recent acts have amply testified to 
his lack of reliability? Even in times of peace Swedish subjects in 
Finland and Estland [Esthonia] have not been safe against Russian 
invasion, because the Russian has us so close to his frontier. Now 


that he has already inflicted injury upon us, should we present him 
an opportunity to do so again when he is actually in our hands? 
No man in his senses, and least of all one who loves his country, 
could ever agree to that. Why, merely for the sake of three or four 
years of peace, should we Swedes be such thoughtless fools as to 
let the Russians come to our very doorsteps in Lijfland [Livonia] 
and Finland, when we can separate ourselves from them with Lake 
Laduga [Ladoga], with the extensive, thirty-miles-wide swamp and 
the turbulent Narfweske [Narova] River, and when it is not their 
custom to remain at peace? Moreover, these territories are not to 
be esteemed too lightly, as they are of great value and also of exten- 
sive area so large, in fact, that they themselves can defray the ex- 
penses connected with holding them. For these reasons it would not 
have been advisable to return these territories to Russia. 

Thus our position has made things more difficult for the Rus- 
sians, in this, that they have been cut off from the shores of the 
Baltic. Henceforth they are forbidden entrance to the Baltic at any 
point, and cannot use it for their ships for their own accommoda- 
tion, either for war purposes or for trade, without our special per- 
mission, as Narwen [Narva] and Ivanogrod [Ivangorod] block their 
outlet through the Narviske [Narova], and Noteborg through the 
Nyen [Neva], and only by these routes could they reach the Baltic 
Sea. They have also seen in the past the benefit to ourselves of the 
control of these rivers, and how this control enabled us to inflict 
injury upon the enemy, for, making use of these rivers, we have 
swept across most of their territories which border upon our coun- 
try. This has given the Russians so much the more reason to hesitate 
about ceding these territories for all time. 

At the opening of the Riksdag in Stockholm, on August 26, 
1617, after the conclusion of the Peace of Stolbovo, Gustavus 
Adolphus made the following remarks: 

This victory is indeed not the least favor that God has bestowed 
upon the government of our fatherland in the course of our reign 
and the reigns of our predecessors. It should be treasured highly, 
because nothing could be better and more glorious than our depriv- 
ing our enemy the Russian, in a just cause, of many mighty castles 
and provinces; yes, we have taken them away from our enemy the 
Russian, who has always boasted of the extensive provinces over 
which he rules. . . . He could justly boast that he was lord and 


master over a large part of Europe and Asia, the most prominent 
regions o the world. His power is not to be belittled, for these coun- 
tries are filled with a numerous nobility, many peasants, and many 
populous cities, and this might he has often demonstrated by the 
inordinately large armies he has led into the field. Boris Gudanow 
[Godunov] first made this apparent when he came into power in 
Russia; it is said that he collected an army of 1,500,000 men in order 
to frighten the Tatars, so that he could win honor by defeating them 
and making them beg for peace. It is not necessary to describe the 
appallingly large armies he has led in the field against us, as there 
are many living today who have seen them with their own eyes. 
This great power of his swells the strength of the naturally well- 
situated lakes and rivers which cover his country, for in a short 
while he could easily transport his forces on the Caspian Sea up 
the Volga and down the Welock [Volkhov] River to the Baltic; and 
along the Dvina and the Thanniam [Niemen?], he could easily 

gather his forces from all corners of his empire What is still 

better, as an eternal reminder of this triumph of ours, they have 
had to turn over to us the fortresses of Ivanogord [Ivangorod], Jama 
[lama], Coporie [Kopor'e], Noteborg [Oreshek], and Kexholm,, to- 
gether with their widely scattered lands and fiefs, according to the 
peace treaty which has just now, thank God, been concluded. 

Yes, it is not less appreciated that because of the location of these 
fortresses we may now live safe and secure in Finland and Estland 
[Esthonia], and be protected against Russian invasions not only in 
times of peace, but also in times of war. Finland is now separated 
from Russia by the large Laduga [Ladoga] Lake, which is probably 
as wide as the ocean between Sweden and the Aland Islands, or the 
distance between Estland [Esthonia] and Nyland [Newland], which 
till now no Pole has ventured to cross. Thus I trust God that hence- 
forth it will be difficult for the Russians to leap this water barrier. 
However, should they manage to get across and may God prevent 
it, the forts o Kexholm and Noteborg, well fortified both by na- 
ture and by construction, may well, next to the power of God, halt 
them for some time and prevent them from entering Finland. Narf- 
wen [Narva] and Iwanogrod [Ivangorod] are shielded by Estland 
[Esthonia] and are also protected by the wide and turbulent Narf- 
wiske [Narova], which rises in the beautiful Lake Peibas [Peipus] 
and which it is not easy to cross. Neither are Narfwen [Narva] and 
Iwanogrod [Ivangorod] easy to take, and no warrior would care to 
cross the Narfwiske [Narova] River without the protection of these 


fortresses. Through this victory, and the peace which has followed, 
not only have the boundaries of Old Sweden been protected, but 
protection has also been given to the sections recently acquired 
by the help of God, for on three sides the Wotskepetiniske country 
[Votskaia Piatina] is bordered by the Baltic and Lakes Laduga [La- 
doga] and Peibas [Peipus], and where the country joins Russia it 
is made secure by enormously large and swampy marshes which 
separate Swedish and Russian territory. The Kexholm province 
or Carelen [Karelia] is also somewhat protected by Lake Laduga 
[Ladoga], while the remaining part spreads into high mountains 
through which no one can take an army. Thus it seems as if God 
Himself, through nature, has wanted to shield us by this victory 
from our treacherous neighbors, the Russians. God has actually 
given us a better opportunity to wage war upon our enemy, if we 
and God forbid have to fight him once more. The way has now 
been opened for us to take ships and lighters up the River Nyen 
[Neva] to Lake Laduga [Ladoga], and by means of the Wolck [Vol- 
khov] River take them to the very gates of Novgorod. Likewise, by 
means of the Sweri [Svir*] River we have access to Lake Ognega 
[Onego], and may enter into the Anegiske [Onega] territory and 
conquer all the region about Novgorod, which is one of the best in 
Russia, and then later on conquer all of Russia's northland. . . .The 
enemy has previously held these positions, and has been able to sail 
back and forth along the aforementioned rivers with lighters, and 
sweep over the entire Finnish archipelago. It would have been diffi- 
cult to prevent him from doing that, as he had many thousands 
of lighters at his disposal, and all Finland might have been in dan- 
ger had he ventured to make use of this opportunity. But, by the 
mercy of God, he is now prevented from doing it, since he can no 
longer show himself in the Baltic with a single boat (to say noth- 
ing of several boats) without our permission. Noteborg lies in the 
middle of the Nyen [Neva], and Narfwen [Narva] and Iwanogrod 
[Ivangorod] are on opposite sides of the Narfwiske [Narova] River, 
so that they can very well prevent the enemy from such an under- 

Besides, these countries will be of great financial benefit to the 
nation, as they are very fertile. There is very little barren land, with 
no mountains or sandy plains. God has bestowed upon it arable 
land, meadows, and pastures in abundance, and there are rivers and 
lakes with a wealth of fish. Wherever there are forests, they have 
become large and dense during these many years of unrest, and are 


filled with all kinds of game, the pelts of which are very valuable. 
If God grants us an extension of the peace, this country with all its 
strange resources will greatly increase Sweden's revenue. I shall re- 
frain from mentioning at this point the large sums of money a mod- 
est and uniform duty may bring, because the trade of all Russia has 
to go through these countries. Besides, these countries may not only 
increase the size of their cities and greatly improve the revenue of 
the crown; they will also improve the conditions and enhance the 
opportunities of every alert subject. And you nobles, and others 
who are anxious to obtain free estates, why do you crowd each other 
here, and fight and quarrel over your few farms? Go yonder to these 
countries and take for yourselves as large estates as you care to have 
and are able to manage. I shall grant you privileges and liberties, 
help you, and show you all the favors I can. Is this not a great bene- 
fit to come out of these countries to enhance our kingdom and 

It is hardly necessary to comment on the significance of this 
testimony by Gustavus Adolphus as proof o the validity of the 
fundamentals laid down in this study. 

As Russia recovered from the Time of Troubles, it was only 
natural that the Russians should plan to recover these strategic 
points, as well as the other territory which they had lost. It 
looked as if they might achieve this in 1656^1658, when they 
seized lamburg and Nienshants and held them for a while. 81 
But the goal was not to be reached until Peter the Great, after 
forming the Northern Coalition, seriously embarked upon the 
task of regaining territorial access to the Baltic for Russia. After 
the Russian defeat at Narva in 1700 at the hands of Charles 
XII, who soon thereafter left for Poland, the reorganized Rus- 
sian army under Sheremet'ev moved into Livonia from Pskov 
in 1702. In the meanwhile Peter the Great, having gone to 
Arkhangelsk, planned and executed a remarkable movement 
which ultimately placed Russian ships on Lake Ladoga, the 
river Neva, and the Baltic. He decided to build a fleet of war- 
ships and transports in the lake region between Arkhangelsk 

31 Entsik. slovar*, XXVII: i, 344. 


and Lake Ladoga and bring them down by the rivers and lakes 
and by new roads over portages through Lake Onego and the 
river Svir*. 32 (See map 8.) 

Spurred on by the Polish king's sarcastic remark that he, 
Peter I, "only sat quietly at home while Poland was being 
devastated by the Swedes'' early in 1702 the Tsar 33 sailed from 
Arkhangelsk to Solovetskii Monastery, then toNiukhcha on the 
Gulf of Onega. From Niukhcha to Povenets on Lake Onego, 
roads and bridges were built and ships were portaged. At Pove- 
nets more ships were built and loaded with guns and ammuni- 
tion and then the naval expedition left Lake Onego and sailed 
by way of the river Svir' to Lake Ladoga. The weather was so 
bad on Lake Ladoga that the contingent of men which he had 
assembled left overland for the ostrog of (Old) Ladoga at the 
mouth of the Volkhov. After recalling Sheremet'ev from Livo- 
nia, Peter I decided, on September 27, 1702, to attack, from 
this place, Noteborg (Oreshek), which fell to the combined 
Russian land and naval forces on October 12. 

Thereupon, after building more ships on the Neva, Peter I 
decided to begin, in April, 1703, an attack on Nienshants near 
the mouth of the Neva where it empties into the Gulf of Fin- 
land. This Swedish fortress fell on May i. In the following 
year, Narva and Dorpat were taken. In 1710, Viborg and Kex- 
holm were seized. The frontier set up at Nystadt in 1721 was 
very much the same as the new boundary arranged in 1940 
between Soviet Russia and Finland. (See map 8.) It included 
Viborg and Kexholm and all of Lake Ladoga in Russia. Such 
a boundary appears rational only when the rivers and portages 
are taken into account. It also proves that Peter the Great 
understood the problem of northern Russia as well as did Gus- 
tavus Adolphus. In this way the Baltic-Caspian axis of Musco- 
vite Russia was created. 

32 N. Ustrialov, Istoriia tsarstuovaniia Petra Velikago (St. Petersburg, 1863), 
/6id v IV:i, 185-206, IV:s, 512-518. 


It was on the basis of this Baltic-Caspian axis that Muscovite 
Russia was able to build an empire in three continents. 

The expansion of Muscovite Russia to world empire: (i) to 
the Black Sea. The absorption of Novgorod and its empire 
and the acquisition of the lower Volga basin opened the gates 
to the middle and upper Volga populations, which now spilled 
over to the south in the direction of the Black Sea and to the 
east and northeast toward Siberia. 

At first the bulk of the migratory population went south; 
here we shall see again that the portages between the Dnieper 
and the Volga on the one side, and the Don and its tributaries 
on the other, played the decisive role. 

To visualize accurately this southward Russian advance to 
the Black Sea, we must bear in mind that the Russians were 
at first represented here by infantry, which utilized, wherever 
possible, movement on river boats through portages, whereas 
the steppe-pony-riding Crimean and Nogai Tatars used chaus- 
sees or land trails (called shliakhi, sakmy, dorogf), which began 
at or near the Black Sea and ran northward through bottleneck 
portages along the watershed between the main rivers and their 
tributaries. 3 * (See maps 9, 10.) 

In the fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries the scene 
of stress was along the series of portages from the Oka (a main 
tributary of the Volga which flowed generally from the west to 
the east) to the Don and the Dnieper. In the earlier part of this 
period, this black soil region furnished grain first for Novgo- 
rod, as already indicated, through Volokolamsk and Torzhok, 

31 For important sources see P.S.R.L., III-XIII; S.G.G. i J>.; N. A. Popov (ed.), 
Akty moskovskago gosudarstva (3 vols., St. Petersburg, 1890-1901); A. A. Lishin 
(ed.), Akty otnosiashchiesia k istorii voiska Donskogo (3 vols. in 4, Novocherkassk, 
1891-1894); and B. N. Bagalei, Materialy dlia istorii kolonizatsii i byta stepnoi 
okrainy Moskovskago gosudarstva (Kharkov, 1886). For the most useful historical 
atlas see K. V. Kudriashov, Russkti istoricheskii atlas (Moscow-Leningrad, 1928). 
For the best analysis see S. E Platonov, "K istorii gorodov i putei na iuzhnoi 
okraine moskovskago gosudarstva v XVI veke," Zhurnal M.N.P., XXXVI (March, 
1898), 81-105. Additional information may be found in Paul Miliukov, Ocherki 
po istorii russkoi kultury (6th ed., St. Petersburg, 1909), Vol. I; V. KKuchevskii, 
Kurs, II, 260 ff. (Hogarth tr., II, 112). 








and later for Moscow. It was also the region of defense against 
raids from the Tatars in the south. These raiders carried off 
valuable loot and numberless victims whom they sold into slav- 
ery. It was the area through which the population of the upper 
and middle Volga was always trying to penetrate in its search 
for fertile lands. It was therefore an area of vital strategic and 
economic importance to the Russian people. 35 

One concrete illustration may be found in the portage on the 
plain of Kulikovo between the Don and its tributaries, where 
the first great victory of Muscovite Russia over the Tatars was 
won in 1380. Here Dmitri Ivanovich, Grand Prince of Moscow, 
earned the title of Donskoi. The immediate region of Kulikovo 
includes the sources of the Upa and Zusha (tributaries of the 
Oka) and the sources of the Don and its tributaries, the Ne- 
priadva and Krasivaia Mecha. This famous portage from the 
Oka to the Don has since become the crossroads of land high- 
ways at Bogoroditsk and the junction of railroads at Uzlovaia 
and at the village of Znamenskoe (Volovo?). ae (See map 9; App. 
i, A. Volga, iii, iv.) 

While on the one hand the Tatars were to use trails, presently 
to be described, which penetrated into this first line of portages 
running roughly west to east between the Oka and the Don, 
on the other hand the Russians were to develop a military de- 
fense, the base of which was to be a line of ostrogs built to 
dominate the portages into the Don River system, as well as the 
river beds of that system itself, as a foothold was obtained on it. 

For the sake of clarity, the chief land trails will first be de- 
scribed, and then the successive lines of ostrogs showing the 
Russian advance to the south will be indicated. 

There were three main trails or roads that ran from the south: 
the Muravskii Shliakh, the Kalmiusskaia Sakma, and the No- 
gaiskaia Doroga (with its three branches). 8T Of these the Mu~ 

35 Some observations may be found in Presniakov, op, cit., pp. 227-228. 

30 See Kudriashov, op. cit., table vi, map 19. 

ar The best description is to be found in Platonov, "K istoril gorodov 
pp. 86-89. ^ or a ma P showing their directions see Kudriashov, op, cit. t table 
VHI, map 23. 



/ \ 










II OF f IE &Mlf 


CHATJSSEES -------- 

of JZ.JJ&rner 



ravskii Shliakh can be most accurately traced. (See map 9.) On 
the others the information is at times vague and conflicting. 

The Muravskii Shliakh may be traced from Perekop on the 
Black Sea (on the isthmus leading into the Crimean peninsula) 
to Tula. (See maps 9-1 1 .) It ran between the Don and the Dnie- 
per river systems as follows: 

i. Perekop 

2. Along the watershed or portage between Konskie Vody (tribu- 
tary of the Dnieper) and Molochnye Vody (which flows into the Sea 
of Azov). 

3. Along the watershed or portage between the Volch'i Vody (tribu- 
tary of the Samara-Dnieper) and the Kalrnius (Sea of Azov). (Here 
a branch called the Kalmiusskaia Sakma took a northeasterly direc- 
tion, crossing the Donets between the Borovaia and the Aidar.) 

4. Along the watershed or portage between the Byk (tributary of 
the Samara-Dnieper) and the Velikii Tor (tributary of the Donets- 
Don). (Here the Muravskii Shliakh continued northwest, while 
a branch of it [known as the Iziumskaia Sakma] crossed the Donets 
at Iziurn directly north and thereafter ran due north between the 
Donets and the Oskol to join the Muravskii Shliakh once more 
along the watershed or portage between the Seim [tributary of the 
Desna-Dnieper] and the Oskol [tributary of the Donets-Don].) 

5. Along the watershed or portage between the Orel'ka (tributary 
of the Orel'-Dnieper) and the Bol'shaia Bereka (tributary of the 

6. Along the watershed or portage between the Orchik (tributary 
of the Orel'-Dnieper) and the Kolomak (tributary of the Vorskla- 



rm &w*, 


Prepared wuter dzrecfaort 




Dnieper) on the west, and the Vodolaga (tributary of the Mozh- 
Donets-Don) and the Mozh (tributary of the Donets-Don) on the 

7. Along the watershed or portage between the Merchik (tributary 
of the Vorskla-Dnieper) and the MerF (tributary of the Merchik- 
Vorskla-Dnieper) on the west, and the Uda (or Udy) (tributary of 
the Donets-Don). 

8. Along the watershed or portage between the sources of the Vor~ 
skla (tributary of the Dnieper) and Donets (tributary of the Don). 

9. Along the watershed or portage between the sources of the fol- 
lowing rivers: Psel (tributary of the Dnieper), Seim (tributary of 
the Desna-Dnieper), and Donets (tributary of the Don). (Here the 
Bakaev Shliakh is reported to have joined it, and from here two 
subsidiary roads started, the one called Svinaia Doroga, for Sevsk, 
and the other called Pakhnuttsova Doroga, for Mtsensk.) 

10. Along the watershed or portage between the sources of the Seim 
(tributary of the Desna-Dnieper) and the Oskol (tributary of the 
Donets-Don), where it was joined by the Iziumskaia Sakma (see 
4 above). 

11. Due north between the Tim and the Olym (tributaries of the 
Bystraia Sosna-Don) and then across the Bystraia Sosna at Livny. 

is. Along the watershed or portage between the Zusha (tributary 
of the Oka) and the Media (tributary of the Don), where it was 
joined by the Nogaiskaia Doroga. 

13. Down the valley of the Upa past Dedilov to Tula. 


The Kalmiusskala Sakma, as indicated under 3, began as an 
offshoot o the Muravskii Shliakh between the sources of the 
Volch'i Vody (tributary of the Samara-Dnieper) and the Kal- 
rnius (which flows into the Sea of Azov). After crossing the 
Donets between its two branches, the Borovaia and the Aidar, 
this trail joined another originating in the southeast at the 
junction of the Donets and Belaia Kalitva. The junction of 
these two trails was along the watershed or portage between the 
sources of the Aidar and the Chernaia Kalitva (a tributary 
of the Don). It thereupon continued due north, crossing the 
Tikhaia Sosna, until it reached the Olym (a tributary of the 
Bystraia-Don). Running north along the Olym, it ended at a 
place which after 1636 was known as Chernavsk, on the By- 
straia Sosna. 

The Nogaiskaia Doroga was the trail used chiefly by the No- 
gai Tatars, whereas the trails previously described were the 
highways of the Crimean Tatars. Its origin was the Don below 
the mouth of the Tsymla, and its direction was north and north- 
east between the sources of the Bystraia (tributary of the Donets- 
Don) and the Tsymla (tributary of the Don) until it crossed the 
Chir and then the Don below the mouth of the Elan' (tributary 
of the Don). Thereafter it ran between the sources of the Pesko- 
vataia Tulucheeva (or Podgornaia), the Seret (or Osered) on 
the west, and the Khoper on the east. These are all tributaries 
of the Don. Thereafter the road ran between the Chigla (tribu- 
tary of the Bitiug-Don), Bitiug (tributary of the Don), and 
Kurlak (tributary of the Bitiug-Don) on the west, and the Elan' 
(tributary of the Suvela-Khoper-Don) and the Takai (or Taka) 
(tributary of the Elan'-Suvela-Khoper-Don) on the east. At this 
portage the Nogaiskaia Doroga divided into two branches. The 
one toward the west joined the Muravskii Shliakh south of 
Dedilov (on the road to Tula), after crossing first the Voronezh 
(tributary of the Don) at Tarbeev Brod, then the Stanovaia 
Riasa (tributary of the Voronezh-Don), then the Don itself be- 
low Donkov (or Dankov), and finally emerged through the 


portage between the Media (tributary of the Don) and the Upa 
(tributary of the Oka). The other branch, which ran directly 
north to Shatsk, proceeded between the Chelnava (tributary of 
the Isna-Moksha-Oka) and the Tsna (tributary of the Moksha- 
Oka), then either crossed the Chelnava or ran west of it, and 
got to Shatsk between the Tsna and the Para (tributary of the 

Undoubtedly the oldest fortified line which protected the 
middle and upper Volga region was that of the Oka, dating 
back to the middle of the sixteenth century. It began at Nizhnii 
Novgorod and extended westward, with its army centered at 
Serpukhov, the right wing being at Kaluga and the left wing 
at Kashira. The line then turned south toward Tula, and thence 
southwest to Kozelsk. (See map 9.) Generally to the south of 
this, but still on the Oka side of the portages from the Oka to 
the Don, was an advance line stretching from Riazan and run- 
ning through Tula and Odoev to Likhvin. 88 

In 1480 Achmet, Khan of the Golden Horde, undertook a 
punitive expedition, in alliance with King Casirnir of Poland- 
Lithuania, against Ivan III, who had rebelled against the Tatar 
yoke. Ivan III sent his family to Lake Beloe (Beloozero) for 
safety, but he himself, in great fear and doubt, finally had to 
face Achmet, who, having eluded such Russian defenses as 
there were, arrived on the Ugra. After facing each other here 
for several months, until the coming of the winter frost, both 
armies retreated hastily from the projected field of battle. This 
episode marked the liberation of Muscovite Russia from the 
Tatar yoke; but not from the peril of Tatar raids, as this was 
demonstrated for a century thereafter, and at no time more 
poignantly or more disastrously, even after the fall of Kazan, 
than in 1571, when Devlet-Girei, Khan of the Crimean Tatars, 
who dreamed of restoring the Tatars to their previous glory, 
suddenly made a raid through the portages and crossed the 

88 On this see Kliuchevskii, Kurs, II, 116-117; Miliukov, op. cit. f I, 56-57; for 
documentary evidence on the strategic importance of Tula, Kaluga, Briansk, and 
Kalaqhev see S.G.G. i D v III, 125-130, 131-136, 156-163. 


Oka, having been guided by Russian refugees through such 
lines of defense as existed. Moscow was sacked. The Tatars got 
away with much booty and caused an enormous loss of life. 39 

Means of defense against such occurrences were investigated 
by a special commission in 1571, whose deliberations resulted 
in the creation thereafter of a new line of defense, known as 
the Line of 157 J. 40 (See map 9, App. i, A. Volga, i-iv; B. Don, 
i-iii; and App. 3.) 

This second main line of defense ran from Alatyr on the Sura 
through Shatsk, Riazhsk, Epifan, Donkov, Rylsk, and Putivl. 
It commanded the portages from the tributaries of the Oka 
and Dnieper to the tributaries of the Don, and in only one 
triangle (Epifan, Donkov, Riazhsk) did it actually get a foot- 
hold on the Don. Here it was to assure control of the most im- 
portant portage from the Oka tributary of the Upa to the Don. 41 
This feature of the line was intended primarily as a defense 
for the Oka country rather than as an aggressive foothold on 
the Don. 

However, it was not long before the line advanced by several 
stages to the domination of the middle Don and Donets, once 
this foothold on the Don was obtained. In 1586 Kursk was re- 
built and Livny and Voronezh were founded or fortified. Kursk 
on the Seim, Livny on the Bystraia Sosna, and Voronezh at the 
junction of the Voronezh and the Don served as an advance net 
to catch the Tatar raids along the Pakhnuttsova Doroga or the 
Muravskii Shliakh. 42 

In 1593 the establishment of Belgorod on the Donets, (Old) 
Oskol on the Oskol, and Valuiki farther down on the Oskol, 

39 Karl Stahlin, Geschichte Russlands von den Anfdngen bis zur Gegenwart 
(4 vols. in 5, Berlin, 1923-1939), I, 219-220. For the Battle on the Ugra (1480) 
see also A. E. Presniakov, "Ivan III na "Ogre'/ Sbornik statei posviashchennykh 
S. F. Platonovu (St. Petersburg, 1911). 

40 For the events leading to the sack of Moscow see Stahlin, op. cit., I, 282-283. 
For documentary material on the results of the work of the commission which 
created the defense line of 1571 see Popov, op. tit., I, 1-17. 

41 Popov, op. cit., I, 3-15; Kudriashov, op. of., table vin, map 23. 

42 Platonov, "K istorii gorodov . . . " pp. 88-89. 


and in 1600 Tsarevo-Borisov near the junction of the Oskol 
and Donets, indicated that a determined effort was being made 
to block the Tatar trails on either side of the Donets and Oskol. 43 
(See map 10.) That fords also played an important part in 
Muscovite and Tatar strategy is to be perceived from these in- 
structions of 1594 and 1633, respectively, of the Tsar: 

If the men of the Crimea or Azov wage war on our frontier, you 
[cossacks] must fight them on the Don, the Donets, and other rivers, 
wherever there are fords to cross. 4 * 

The cossacks are to fight the men from Azov, the Crimea, and the 
Nogai country in the steppe, along the rivers, and at the fords. The 
cossacks are to supply boats and rowers for the Russian embassy 
returning from Turkey along the Don and the Voronezh/ 5 

However, it seems evident that these advances between 1586 
and 1600 were not sufficient to dominate the Tatar trails. Be- 
tween 1637 and 1680 during the period of the annexation of 
the Ukraine (1654) it became necessary to consolidate Mos- 
cow's grip on the middle Donets and Don in order to hold the 
Tatars at bay by a complex and intricate system of ostrogs and 
fortified lines, some of which are to be found in the Russian 
Academy Atlas of 1745. This system it was much more than 
a single line brought the entire region from the Vorskla to 
the Don, with all its trails and rivers, under Russian control. 
Its chief line ran from Akhtyrka on the Vorskla to Karpov, Bel- 
gorod, Korocha, lablonov, (New) Oskol, Usero, Olshansk, Os- 
trogozhsk, Voronezh, Kozlov, Tambov, Insar/ There remained 
no portage and no ford through which the Tatars might pour 
into the region from the Vorskla to the Don that was not forti- 
fied by an ostrog. 47 Izium (founded in 1680) guarded, with 

, 45; Bagaiei, op. cit., p. 8. 

4 * Lishin, op. dt. } I, 4. 

45 Ibid., I, 11-13, 31. 

m For the line see Kudriashov, op. cit., table vin, map 23; for sources, see Akty 
arkheograficheskoi ekspeditsii, III, 397, 410-411, IV, 30; Bagaiei, op. cit. f 54-73, 
118-127; Miliukov, op. cit.f I, 58-60; Lishin, op. cit. f pp. 92, 150, 175, 179. 

47 A partial list o the ostrogs built in this region, apart from those on the line 
just indicated, consisted of the following. On the Kolomak: Kolomak, Vysoko- 


Tsarevo-Borisov, the ford or passage over the Donets o the 
Iziumskala Sakma, a branch of the Muravskii Shliakh. The 
ostrog Tor on the Velikil Tor built in 1 668 and the ostrog Novo- 
Bogoroditsk on the Byk constructed in 1687 controlled the 
portage through which the Muravskii Shliakh passed south of 
the Donets. Here it was possible to check the Tatars in the very 
beginnings of a raid. is (See map 1 1.) 

Along this system between Kozlov and Tambov, the Nogai- 
skaia Doroga made its way and divided into two branches, the 
one aiming at Tula in the west and the other at Shatsk in the 
north. These two points controlled both trails, (See map 1 1.) 

The portage (or portages) from the Volga to the Don con- 
tinued, at this period, as in the most ancient times, to play a 
role of some importance. The protection for the direct portage 
from the Volga to the Don at Sarkel (Belaia Vezha) was indicated 
by the following ostrogs in the eighteenth century: Tsaritsyn 
(now Stalingrad), Meshochnaia, Grachi, Osokor, and Donskaia. 
Another portage much used was up the Kamyshinka (tributary 
of the Volga), and then over the portage to the Ilovlia (tribu- 
tary of the Don). It is also likely that either of the following 
tributaries of the Don may have been used for direct portage 
to the Volga: the Chervlennaia, the Donskaia, the Tsaritsa, or 
the Esaulovskaia-Aksai, (See App. i, A. Volga, i-iv.) 

Just before the raid of 1480 by Achmet, that ruler planned 
to dig a canal joining the two rivers. Such a canal was later 
projected several times under Sultan Selini, and again by Peter 
the Great, and it is now one of the projects being undertaken 
by the Soviet government. In 1569 the military commander 
(voevoda) Saburov was appointed to serve at the portage. In 
1691 the Tsar sent a message saying: ". . . it has become known 

poFe, Perekop; on the Merlia: Rublevka, Krasnyi Kut, Murafa, Merchik, Volnyl 
Kurgan; from the Donets westward: Blshkin, Zmiev, Sokolov, Merefa, Valki, 
Chuguev, Kharkov, Olshansk, Zolochev, Udy, Saltov; east from the Donets: 
Balakleia, Volch'e, Nizhgolsk; on the Oskol: Tsarevo-Borisov, Solenaia, Goro- 
khovatka, Borovaia, Senkovo, Kupenka, Dvurechnaia, Kamenka. 
See Kudriashov, op. tit., table vni, map 23, and Lishin, op. tit., p. 150. 


to us that the ... cossacks, Ataman Philip Sula and his com- 
rades, who had previously been on the Volga, . . * intend to take 
boats and supplies from the Don to the Volga!' 49 

The elaborate system o lines connecting ostrogs and forti- 
fied towns and advance ostrogs consisted of abatis in the for- 
est, and bulwarks and ditches on the plains. These made up a 
continuous line (called cherta), defended by stationary guards 
(called storozhi) and by mobile patrols (called stanitsy). In this 
way, every trail, every ford, and every river was obstructed and 
under surveillance. 

Thus in little more than one hundred years from the erection 
of the defense line of 1571 Moscow gained control of the middle 
courses of the Donets and the Don. The subsequent history of 
this region indicates that the Russians descended the Donets 
and the Don and that Russian expansion, blocked at first by 
Lithuanians and Poles, and then by Tatars and Turks, made 
its way from river bank to river bank on the northern shores of 
the Black Sea, both east and west from the Don, until in the 
reign of Catherine II the entire northern and eastern shores 
fell into the hands of the Russians. 

The expansion of Muscovite Russia to world empire: (2) to 
the Pacific. When we turn to this phase of the Russian urge to 
the sea, we find that basic materials for research are more copi- 
ous and as a consequence reveal more clearly the dynamics of 
the advance and the policy pursued by the government and by 
individuals. We see again the same basic elements that emerged 
from our examination of the centuries of Russian experience 
in Europe: rivers, portages, ostrogs, monasteries, and furs. Only 
the data most necessary to illustrate the theme of this study will 
be included here. 51 

40 S.G.G. i D., II, 52; Lishin, op. cit. f pp, 164-165; Bol'shaia sov. entsik., XII, 
685 ff., XL, 404-406; Atlas rossiiskoi (St. Petersburg, 1745), map 10, 

50 S. E Platonov, Ivan Grozny i (Berlin, 1924), pp. 124-125. 

B1 The present author has in preparation a series of volumes on Russian east- 
ward expansion, in part monographic, in part documentary, which will cover all 
phases of this development. At present the best general accounts of the history 




For the application of centuries of experience a magnificent 
opportunity was offered by Siberia, with its series of river basins 
and easy portages from the tributaries of the Pechora and the 
Kama in Europe, through the Ob', Enisei, Lena, and Amur to 
the Pacific. Siberia still remains the world's greatest source of 
supply of furs. Here, more clearly than in European Russia, 52 
we sense that the advance came as a result of the relative exhaus- 
tion of fur-bearing animals in easily accessible areas. The rate 
of exhaustion determined the speed of the expansion. The 
Siberian fur trade in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, 
we know, was one of the best sources of revenue of the Russian 
state and was the largest single item in its foreign trade. 53 

The Urals, rising from 1000 to 5500 feet above sea level, have 
never been a barrier. The portages from the Kama and the 
Pechora in Europe to the Ob* in Siberia are not much higher 
than 2000 feet above sea level at any point and generally the 
approach to them is gradual. When fur-bearing animals began 
to diminish in the Russian northeast, Siberia beckoned. 

East across the Urals is the great River Ob s with its important 
tributaries, the Tavda, Tura, Tobol, and Irtysh. Hardy traders 
and trappers of Novgorod often penetrated the Pechora-Ural- 
Ob' portages. (See maps 4, 12, 13, 18.) The lower reaches of 
the Ob' were exploited definitely from about the fourteenth 
century, if not earlier. The advance into this region from the 
basin of the Pechora and its tributaries by portage over the 

of Siberia ,are V. I. Ogorodnikov, Ocherk istorii Sibiri do nachala XIX veko. 
(g vols. in 2 parts, Irkutsk-Vladivostok, 1920-1924), and other studies by the 
same author; S. V. Bakhrushin, Ocherki po istorii kolonizatsii Sibirii v XVI i 
XVII w. (Moscow, 1927-1928); Gerhard E Mueller, Istoriia Sibiri (St. Petersburg, 
1750, also 1787; Moscow-Leningrad, 1937 [this edition is used hereafter]); P. N. 
Butsinskii, Zaselenie Sibiri i byt peruykh ee nasel'nikov (Kharkov, 1889); V. K. 
Andrievich, Istoriia Sibiri (in 2 parts, St. Petersburg, 1889), and four other vol- 
umes of Siberian history by this author. For further bibliographical items see 
Robert J. Kerner, Northeastern Asia: A Selected Bibliography (2 vols., Berkeley, 


52 See Miliukov, op. vit., I, 71-73. 

53 The best monograph is that of Raymond H. Fisher, The Russian Fur Trade 
(1550-1700) (doctoral dissertation, University of California, 1937; now * n press). 


Urals was in the manner of the raid: by levying tribute (iasaK) 
of furs and of such silver as could be obtained from the natives, 
by exacting homage and further promises of tribute, followed 
by withdrawal, this formula to be repeated from time to time 
if promises were not fulfilled. Similar in nature were the ex- 
peditions carried out by Moscow in the years 1465, 1483, and 
1499, and executed by portage over the Urals from the Pechora 
basin; they, too, were raids. 54 So, in fact, was the so-called con- 
quest of Siberia by Yermak in the years from 1579 to 1584. 
Yermak, however, definitely undermined and almost succeeded 
in shattering the power of the Tatar khan, Kuchum, in the 
basin of the Ob'. 

The enterprising family of Stroganovs, however, planned to 
occupy the territory into which the former Volga pirate ad- 
vanced. It was only when Yermak's initial success in taking the 
Siberian capital, Sibir, became known that Moscow realized 
what an opportunity was presented, not only for using the re- 
gion to defend the back yard of European Russia against the 
raids of Siberian peoples, but also to establish there a profitable 
base for an advance into Asia. For these reasons, apparently, 
Moscow sent reinforcements to Yermak, at his request as well 
as at the request of the Stroganovs, and finally completed the 
conquest after his death. But, in so doing, Moscow abandoned 
the policy of the raid for one of planned domination of rivers 

C(l Arkhangelsk Chronicle (ed. 1781), p. 141, quoted by Bakhrushin, op, cit. t 
pp. 67, 89; Shcheglov, op. cit., p. 10, who refers to the Arkhangelsk Chronicle 
without indication of page; E G. Mueller, op. cit., pp. 202-204, has quotations 
from unpublished archival material (pp, 203-204); S. Herberstein, Zapiski o 
moskovitskikh delahh (trans. A. I. Malein; St. Petersburg, 1908), pp. 125, 133; 
Voskresensk Chronicle, P.S.RX., VttI, 237; Sofia Chronicle, JRS.JR.L V VI, 43-44; 
Ogoroclnikov, op. cit.,H:i, 12-16; A. Oksenov, "Slukhi i vcsti o Sibiri doYermaka," 
Sibirskii sbornik (St. Petersburg, 1887), IV, 108-1 16; for the background of the 
advance to the Urals see A. A. Kixevetter, Russkii sever (Vologda, 1919), and 
S. F. Platonov, Proshloe russkoga senem (Leningrad, 1923). 

GB Stroganov Chronicle, Arkheograficheskaia Kommissiia, Sibtrskiia letopisi (St. 
Petersburg, 1907), pp. u, 16, 21, 28, 37, 45, 59, 85; Esipov Chronicle, ibid., p. 
308; Remezov Chronicle, ibid., pp. 313, 314, 316, 317, 322; Mueller, op. cit., pp. 
215-216, 219-221, 223-228; I. G, Akulinin, Yermak i Slroganovy (Paris, 1933), PP- 


and portages through the building of ostrogs. Three expedi- 
tions were sent into Siberia in the years 1583, 1585, and 1586, 
the second and third after the death of Yermak. Two of them 
abandoned Siberia; the third was ordered to build two ostrogs, 
which became known as Tiumen (1586) and Tobolsk (1587) 
Tiumen guarded the Tura route into the Ob' basin. Tobolsk, 
at the junction of the Ob' and the Irtysh, became a center of 
power in all directions. In 1594 the building of Tara, farther 
to the east on the Irtysh, gave the Russians three points almost 
in an east and west line. Attention was given at once to gaining 
or maintaining complete domination of the highways into this 
area from Russia, when the first state road was charted along 
the Kama-Vishera-Lozva portage route. The Lozva was a tribu- 
tary of the Tavda. In the upper reaches of the Lozva a temporary 
ostrog, Lozvinsk, was constructed in 1590. However, a better 
road was from Perm through Pelym. Lozvinsk was used to con- 
quer Pelym in 1594. But the best and most direct route from 
the Volga-Kama basin along the Tura was finally controlled by 
building the ostrog and town of Verkhoturie in 1598 on the 
upper reaches of the Tura, and the ostrog Turinsk in its middle 
course in 1600. Tiumen defended the lower course of the Tura. 
Thus by 1600 Moscow had a fortified route from the Kama to 
the Tobol and Irtysh over which Verkhoturie, Turinsk, and 
Tiumen stood guard. 57 There remained only the building of 
ostrogs at other strategic points in the basin. In 1593 the ostrog 

59 Remezov Chronicle, Sibirskiia letopisi, pp. 339, 344> 348-349; Stroganoy 
Chronicle, ibid., pp. 76, 85, 87; Mueller, op. rit., pp. 253, 266, 274-275; "Zapiski, 
k sibirskoi istorii sluzhashchiia . . . T Drevniaia rossiiskaia vivliofika, III, 107-108; 
Ogorodnikov, op. cit. f II: i, 32-35; Butsinskii, op. ciL, pp. 84, 104. 

57 See instructions to A. Eletskoi about building a town on the river Tara (1593- 
1594) in Mueller, op. dt. f pp. 354-361; for Lozvinsk see ibid., p. 277, referring to 
material in the archives, and Butsinskii, op. cit., p. 16; for Pelym see the in- 
structions to Gorchakov, about 1594, Arkheograficheskaia Kommissiia, Russkaia 
istoricheskaia biblioteka (39 vols., St. Petersburg, 1875-1927; hereafter cited as 
R.I.B.), II, 103-120; also Mueller, op. cit., pp. 346-354; for Verkhoturie see in- 
structions to Golovin, 1597, about the construction of a town on the Tura, .R.Z.B., 
II, 56-61; for Turinsk see instructions to lanov about the construction of an 
ostrog in Epanchin (Turinsk), 1600, R.I.B., II, 66-74; also Mueller, op. ciL, pp. 


Berezov was built along the lower Ob', and in 1595 that of 
Obdorsk at the mouth. Five years later the Taz River to the 
east was reached and Tazovsk (later called Mangazeia) was built. 
Surgut was founded in 1594 on the middle course of the Ob', 
and farther up the river to the east, Narym in 1596 and Ketsk 
in 1597 (1602?), on the Ket' tributary of that river. Narym 
and Ketsk opened up and commanded the middle and upper 
reaches of the Ob' inhabited by Tatar and Kirghiz tribes. In 
1604 at the junction of the Ob' and the Tom was built the 
ostrog of Tomsk, which guarded the gateway from the steppes 
into the Ob' basin. Later, in 1618, as an advanced outpost, 
Kuznetsk was built farther up (to the south) on the Tom. 68 (See 
App. 4.) 

In this way, and chiefly during the first decade and a half 
after the death of Yermak, nearly all the strategic points in the 
basin were occupied and the region thoroughly subjugated. 
In the course of this process the native Ostiak, Vogul, Samoied, 
Tatar, and Kirghiz tribes were forced to pay tribute in fur. The 
process of subjugation itself was control of river and portage 
by ostrogs from the Volga-Kama basin to the Ob' and the estab- 
lishment of ostrogs as outposts against nomad populations to 
the south and southeast. 

Starting out as the private, chartered enterprise of the Stro- 
ganov family, the venture was taken over by the state, which 
ended the period of raids and began the occupation of the ter- 
ritory, creating thereby a defense for European Russia against 
raids from Asia, and at the same time a profi table and solid base 
for Russian expansion into Asia. It was the result of a planned 
movement based on previous Russian national experience, 

w On Berezov see instructions to Gorchakov, 1592, Mueller, op. cit. f pp. 283, 
346; on Obdorsk see ibid., p. 498; on Tazovsk and Mangazeia see instructions to 
Mosalskii and Pushkin, 1601, RJ.B. f pp. 814-833; E N. Butsinskii, Mangazeia 
(Kharkov, 1893), pp. i~66, passim; on Surgut, Narym, and Ketsk, see Butsinskii, 
K istorii Sibiri: Surgut, Narym i Ketsk do 1645 g. (Kharkov, 1893), pp. 2, 16, 19, 
24; on Tomsk see instructions to Bezobrazov, 1604, RJ.B*, II, 78-79; on Kuznetsk 
see the correspondence o the Siberian military commanders (voevodas) concern- 
ing the building of Kuznetsk, 1617-1621, Mueller, op. dt. f pp. 451-455. 


Thousands o sables and other furs now enriched the treasury 
of the state and the pockets of many private traders. 59 

The same process led ever eastward. State enterprise had 
brought western Siberia into the Russian empire; individual 
initiative, in which the few and scattered officials participated, 
was chiefly the cause for Russia's reaching the Pacific a genera- 
tion later. Individuals and groups of entrepreneurs (opytov- 
shchiks) sought "unused lands and natives not paying tribute:' 
The state followed after them, constructing ostrogs to com- 
mand rivers and portages and supervising the collection of trib- 
ute from the natives. 

We turn now from the basin of the Ob' to the basin of the 
Enisei. The latter was penetrated chiefly from two points. (See 
maps 14, 18.) 

At the north, up the Taz from Mangazeia to its source and 
by portage to the Turukhan was a relatively short distance. In 
1607, at the junction of the Turukhan and the Enisei and op- 
posite the Lower (Nizhniaia) Tiinguska there was built the 
little ostrog (ostrozhek) of Turukhansk. From this point, clearly 
commanding the lower half of the Enisei, Russian traders and 
trappers went up the river after 1607 and down the river to the 
sea after iGio. 60 

In the south, the Russians advanced up the Ket' River (a trib- 
utary of the Ob') from Ketsk to its upper reaches, where the 
ostrog of Makovsk was built in 1618. Makovsk guarded a por- 
tage of some seventy versts (forty-six miles) to the Enisei. Cross- 
ing the portage, an ostrog was built under the name of Eniseisk 

69 Akulinin, op. cit., passim, esp., p. 56; Ogorodnikov, op. tit., II, 26-27; Ba- 
khrushin, op. cit., p. 99; Stroganov Chronicle, Sibirskiia letopisi, pp. 10-11; 
ibid., Esipov Chronicle, p. 317. 

60 Fisher, op. cit. f p. 67; Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp. 146, 151, 155-157; "Istoriche- 
skie akty o podvigakh Erofeiia Khabarova na Amure v. 1649-1651 gg.r Zhurnal 
dlia chteniia vospitannikam voenno-uchebnykh zavedenii (St. Petersburg, 1840), 
No. 105, p. 62; report of Voevoda Frantsbekov concerning the expedition of 
Khabarov to the Amur River, 1650, Arkheograficheskaia Kommissiia, Dopol- 
neniia k ahtam istoricheskim (12 vols., St. Petersburg, 1846-1872; hereafter cited 
as DAI.), Ill, 258-261; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 32, 35, 40-44; J. E. Fischer, 
Sibirskaia istoriia (St. Petersburg, 1774), p. 237. 


Trade f3oue$ 





in 1619. It was destined, after Tobolsk, to be a most important 
source of activity in Siberia. It stood at the junction o the 
Enisei and the Upper (Verkhniaia) Tunguska. To dominate the 
basin of the Enisei from the south, the ostrog of Krasnoiarsk 
was constructed high up on the Enisei in 1628, and that year 
also the ostrog of Kansk was built on the Kan tributary of the 
Enisei. Thus in two decades (1607-1626) this river system was 
brought into Russian hands and the native Tungus and other 
tribes were forced to pay tribute. 61 (See App. 4.) 

Two elements in the situation always led the Russians on: the 
rivers, and the hope of greater riches in furs farther ahead. The 
numbers of easily accessible fur-bearing animals soon showed 
signs of diminishing. This was an added incentive to move on. 

And so the next river system, that of the Lena to the east, 
was penetrated. (See maps 15, 19.) In the late 'twenties, fur- 
bearing animals in the Enisei basin began to diminish rapidly, 
and traders and trappers, penetrating into the Lena basin, 
found themselves in difficulties before hostile natives. 62 As a re- 
sult, the military commanders of Tobolsk and Eniseisk took a 
hand, impelled by visions of increased tribute returns and il- 
legal personal profits. They competed with each other. The 
Lena region was entered from the north, especially from Man- 
gazeia and Tiirukhansk, by advancing up the Lower Tunguska 
to its source and then across the Chichuisk portage near the 
mouth of the Kirenga River to the Lena. From south of the 
Enisei private individuals and officials entered that region over 
the Him portage from the Upper Tunguska and its tributary, 
the Angara. The Him portage became, in 1630, the site for the 
Ilimsk winter quarters. In that same year, Kirensk on the 

81 G. E Mueller, "Sibirskaia istoriiaj' Ezhemesiachnyta sochineniia . . . akademii 
nauk (St. Petersburg, October, 1763), pp. 363-365; A. A. Titov (ed.), SibirvXVII 
veke (Moscow, 1890), pp. 47, 82; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II: i, 44-47; Bakhrushin, 
op. cit. f pp. 110-112, 124-125, 127; Fischer, op. cit., pp. 276-277, 282. 

02 Instructions to Golovin, 1638, JRJjB., II, 961-972; on lakutsk, see Titov, 
Sibir v XVII veke, p. 22; report of Lena (lakutsk) military commanders (voe- 
vodas) concerning furs gathered on the Viliui and about depredations by the 
natives, 1639, DA.I., II, 230-231; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 48-50. 


Lena was constructed, and two years later, much farther down 
that river, the ostrog of lakutsk, which, after Tobolsk and 
Eniseisk, became the next center of importance. Quickly other 
ostrogs were built: Zhigansk in 1632, between lakutsk and 
the mouth of the Lena, to dominate its lower course; Amginsk 
in 1633, on the Aldan River, a tributary of the Lena, which 


indicated the road to the Pacific on the east and the Amur 
on the south; Viliuisk, in 1634, controlling the connection be- 
tween the Lower Tunguska and the Chona with the Viliui 
River, which flowed east into the Lena; and Olekminsk in 1635, 
at the junction of the Olekma and the Lena. In 1636 Kopylov 
went up the Aldan beyond Amginsk to the mouth of the Maia, 
where he constructed the Butalsk winter quarters. It was from 
here three years later, in 1639, that a detachment of twenty 
men, sent up the Maia and the ludoma, crossed the divide, 
descended the Ulia to the Sea of Okhotsk, and explored that 
body of water from the Tauia on the north, where winter quar- 
ters were set up, to the River Uda on the south, where the Udsk 


ostrozhek was founded. In this way the shores of the Pacific 
were reached. 63 (See maps 15, i6 ? 20.) 

For the next decade and a half the wild and remote coun- 
try of the lukagirs the basins of the Iana ? Indigirka, Alazeia, 
Kolyma, and Anadyr rivers was overrun by men sailing down 
the Lena to the sea and up the lana, where the Verkhoiansk os- 
trog was built in 1638; or crossing the Verkhoiansk range and 


descending the Indigirka, where the Zashiversk ostrog was con- 
structed in 1639, or going across country from the Indigirka 
to the Alazeia. The Kolyma was discovered from the sea, and 
Nizhne-Kolymsk, near its mouth, was founded in 1644. In 1649 
the Anadyrsk ostrog went up on the middle course of the 
Anadyr. 04 In the meanwhile, led on by the prospect of getting 
a haul of tusks, Dezhnev and others in 1648 sailed down the 
Kolyma to the sea, rounded the eastern end of Siberia, and 

63 On lakutsk see instructions to Golovin, 1638, R.LB,, II, 961-972; description 
of rivers, 1640-1641, D.AJ., II, 243-248; on Ilimsk see Fischer, op. cit. t pp. 351, 
354; on Okhotsk see the Petition of Serving Men, 1651, and the description of the 
route of Okhotsk, 1651, DA.L, III, 320-325; report of the serving man Epishev, 
1652, D.A.I., III, 332-343; Ogorodnikov, 'op, cit., II, 50-53. (Sluzhilye liudi, 
literally "serving men? indicates men in military service.) 

*V. I. Ogorodnikov, Iz istorii pokoreniia Sibiri. Pokorenie lukagirskoi zemli 
(Chita, 1922), passim; idem, Ocherki po istorii ... . , II, 54-57; Bakhrushin, op. ciL, 
pp. 128-132. 


returned safely up the Anadyr, Thus they proved, nearly a hun- 
dred years before Bering, that Asia and North America were 
separated by a body of water. 63 

The Buriat country in and around Lake Baikal was pene- 
trated in about three decades. This region was most difficult 
to master, the Buriats, who were Mongols, being warlike, and 
topographic conditions hard. Raids were made into this region 
from Eniseisk, Krasnoiarsk, and lakutsk, not only because it 
lay near and, in fact, across the route to the sea, but also be- 
cause, besides furs, there was a rumor that silver could be 
found there. This rumor was to lead hunters later into the 
basin of the Amur. The forces stationed at the three ostrogs 
competed strenuously for the prize. 

The region west of Lake Baikal was dominated through the 
Him portage from the Enisei into the Lena basin. Here the 
powerful ostrog (1630), and later town, of Ilimsk (in 1649) 
had been founded. Eniseisk military commanders, basing their 
headquarters on this strategic point, advanced their detach- 
ments along the Upper Tunguska and then along the Angara, 
establishing the Bratsk ostrog (1631) and, twenty-one years 
later, on the same river nearer Lake Baikal, winter quarters 
at the Irkut, which became the ostrog of Irkutsk (1661). In 
1654, midway between Bratsk and Irkutsk on the Angara, the 
ostrog of Balagansk went up. Thus the road to Lake Baikal was 
opened from the west, with Irkutsk and its rising town as the 
center of power in this region. 66 (See map 16.) 

65 L. S. Berg, Otkrytie Kamchatki I ekspeditsii Beringa, 1125-1742 (Leningrad, 
1935), pp.-28 ff. note esp. his destructive criticism of F. A. Colder, Russian Ex- 
pansion on the Pacific, 1641-1850 (Cleveland, 1914), pp. 67-95, 268-288; N. N. 
Ogloblin, "Semen Dezhnev (1638-1671 gg.)J* Zhurnal M.NJ 3 ., CCLXXII (Novem- 
ber-December, 1890), 249-306; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 57-61. 

60 Reports of lakutsk military commanders (voevodas) Golovin and Glebov, 
1641, DA .1., II, 258-261; reports of serving men, 1641, ibid., II, 261; report of 
the Eniseisk military commander (voevoda) Uvarov, 1646, ibid.. Ill, 68-70; report 
of the Krasnoiarsk military commander (voevoda) Skriabin, 1653, ibid., Ill, 387- 
390; Fischer, op. tit., pp. 350, 354, 54O~54^ 557^ N - N - Ogloblin, Obozrenie 
stolbtsov i knig Sibirskago Prikaza (4 vols., Moscow, 1895), IV > 37* Ogorodnikov, 
Ocherki po istorii . . . , II, 62-65. 


In the meanwhile the Buriats along the Ud River to the west 
were subjugated from Krasnoiarsk by the construction in 1 648 
of the Udinsk ostrozhek, later known as Nizhne-Udinsk. 67 

The lakutsk military commanders undertook the conquest 
of the Buriats living in the upper Lena and northern Baikal 
region, where in the far upper reaches of the Lena they built 
the ostrozhek of Verkholensk in 1641, from which they could 
penetrate the northern half of Lake Baikal. Further expedi- 
tions advanced from the Lena up the Vitim on the northeastern 
side of the lake, where in 1646 the ostrozhek Verkhne- Angarsk 
went up; farther down on the east shore of the lake, at the 
mouth of the Barguzin River, the ostrog of Barguzinsk was 
built in 1648. From here the way into the Amur River system 
was explored. In 1653 two ostrogs, Ust'-Prorva, at the mouth of 
the Selenga, and Irgensk on Lake Irgen, and in the next year 
Nerchinsk, at the mouth of the Nercha where it flows into the 
Shilka (a tributary of the Amur), were built. Although the 
ostrog of Nerchinsk was destroyed by the Tunguses, it was re- 
built in 1658. Thus began the process of protecting the route 
leading from the Baikal region into the Amur basin. To this 
system of protected points were added three other ostrogs, 
Telembinsk on the Khilka (1658) and Verkhne-Udinsk and 
Selenginsk (1665) on the Selenga, In this way the domination 
of the Buriat region was completed and a direct route into 
the Amur basin opened up and controlled. 88 

But the Eniseisk people were not alone in forging a road 
into the inviting region of the Amur, which rumor filled not 
only with furs and food, but with silver as well. The lakutsk 
military commanders sent out Vasilii Poiarkov, and his fa- 
mous explorations resulted. In 1643 he went up the Aldan, 
the Uchur, and the Gonam, crossed the lablonnoi range and 

07 Fischer, op. cit. t p. 541; Ogorodnikov, op, cif.. t II, 66. 

M Letter 06 the Eniseisk military commander (voevoda) Pashkov, to the Tomsk 
military commander (voevoda) Volynskii concerning ostrogs on the River Shilka 
and Lake Irgcn, 1653, DA.L, HI, 343-345; Fischer, op, cit*, pp. 535?, 561, 567; 
Ogorodnikov, op, cit., II, 66-73. 


portage, and then went down the Brianta, the Zeia, and the 
Amur to Its mouth. He returned to lakutsk In 1646 from the 
Sea of Okhotsk, after crossing the Stanovol ridge and sailing 
down the Maia and the Aldan to the Lena. Poiarkov dispelled 
the beautiful dream of a Promised Land of silver, but he dis- 
covered a fertile agricultural region, the possession of which 
by Russia would mean not only strategic security for eastern 
Siberia and easy access to the Pacific, but also a center of grain 
cultivation for that area. The lack of an adequate grain-produc- 
ing region in eastern Siberia was to make Russia's hold on the 
Pacific precarious for two centuries. 69 

It was soon found by private traders and trappers that the 
best route from the Lena to the Amur was up the Olekma and 
Its tributary the Tiigir over the lablonnol range, called here the 
Tuglr portage, and down to the Shllka and the Amur. To make 
this route secure the ostrozhek of Ust'-Strelochnyi was con- 
structed In 1651 at the junction of the Shilka and the Argun'. 

Tiigirsk, built at the portage in 1653, was abandoned when 
Nerchinsk was founded the next year .The most used route from 
the west, however, became the Baikal-Selenga-Ud- Teiemba- 
Chita-Ingoda-Shilka road, of which we have already spoken. 70 
(See maps 15, 16.) 

For the purposes of this study it is not necessary to narrate 
the activities of the Russians under E. P. Khabarov and others 
in the Amur valley or to explain why they failed, In their con- 
flict with the Manchus, to establish themselves there, as is in- 
dicated by the Treaty of Nerchinsk in 1689. To have done so 

68 Documents concerning the journey of Vasilii Poiarkov . . . , 1646, D.A.L, III, 
50-60; report from lakutsk, 1651, Arkheograficheskaia Komrnissla, Akty istori- 
cheskie (5 vols., St. Petersburg, 1841-1842, index, 1843), IV, 76; V. I. Ogorodnikov, 
"Tuzemnoe i russkoe zemledelie na Amure v XVIII v." Trudy gosudarstvennogo 
dal'nevostochnogo universiteta (Vladivostok, 1927), Ser. Ill, No. 4, p. 9; Robert 
J. Kerner, "Russian Expansion to America? Papers of the Bibliographical Society 
of America, XXV (1931), 111-129; Ogorodnikov, Ocherkipo istorii , . . " II, 74-82. 

70 Report of the lesser noble, Beketov, to the military commander (voevoda) 
of Eniseisk, Pashkov, 1653, D.A.L, III, 390-396; Bakhrushin, op. cit. f pp. 138- 
139; N. Spafarii, "Puteshestvie chrez Sibir . . . Nikolaia Spafariia v 1675 . . . " 
Zapiski imperatorskago russkago geograficheskago obshchestva po otdeleniiu 
etnografii, Vol. X, No. i (1882), pp. 136-140; Ogorodnikov, Ocherki po istorii 

TT o_x 


would have required much more than raids, which was all they 
had in their bag of tricks. It would have required, besides 
ostrogs, an armed colonizing population capable o developing 
agriculture as a defense against the Manchus, who, to make 
Russian tenure impossible, destroyed the fields and brought 
hunger upon the invading Russians in a relatively fertile re- 
gion. 71 The task here has been to show how the process of ex- 
pansion worked. The policy of raids failed in the Amur River 
valley, just as did the policy of raids both by Novgorod and 
Moscow throughout the first century of their contacts with the 
region beyond the Urals. Siberia was only conquered with the 
adoption of the policy of planned occupation by river and por- 
tage and ostrog, carried out with a sufficiently numerous group 
of colonizers. Such would have been the fate of the Amur valley 
had Moscow been able to back up the raiders with a sufficiently 
strong army and numerous colonists. Caught by war in Europe 
and suffering disastrous defeats at the hands of the Crimean 
Tatars, Russia was unable, at the end of the seventeenth cen- 
tury, to repeat what she had done in western Siberia. This was 
not accomplished until almost two centuries later. Other op- 
erative factors in the process were, mainly, the fur trade, which 
was the predominant incentive, and the activities of govern- 
ment officials, missionaries, and churchmen. 

It has already been stated that the fur trade was synonymous 
with the conquest of Siberia. The Moscow government was the 
chief fur trader. 72 It collected the tribute or tax in furs from 
the natives. It collected a lo-per cent tax in the best furs from 
the private traders and trappers. In addition, it insisted on the 

71 Reports of serving men concerning Khabarov's activities on the Amur, 1652, 
D-.A.L, III, 346-348; instruction of the lakutsk military commander (voevodd) 
to the serving man Prokofiev (1653), reports of the serving men Uvarov and 
Ermolin (1652!), report of Erofei Khabarov (1652), D.A.L, III, 352-371; E, Robin- 
son, "The First Conquest of the Amur" (seminar report, History 249&, University 
of California, 1938), passim; Chen (Biutao Ho, So Fang Pel Sheng) (68 vols., 
Peking, 1868), introduction to VI, 17, App. A; Ogorodnikov, Qcherki po istorii 

"Kerner, "Russian Expansion to America^' op. cit., pp. in-iia, 114-115; 
Bakhrushin, op. cit. f pp. 140, 168-169; Ogorodnikov, Ocherki po istorii , . . , II, 



right of buying from merchants and trappers the best furs 
they obtained. Furthermore, the government exercised a mo- 
nopoly on the sables and black foxes sold to China. This made 
possible a lucrative foreign trade, with Russian furs playing a 


leading role in the fur markets of Europe (Leipzig) and China. 
We know that furs were the most important single item in the 
foreign and domestic commerce of Russia in the sixteenth 
and seventeenth centuries. There is a statement to the effect 
that as early as 1586 the state treasury received 200,000 sables, 


10,000 black foxes, 500,000 squirrels, besides beavers and er- 
mines, from Siberia. Estimates of the income of the state from 
Siberian furs in the middle of the seventeenth century range 
from about 7 to about 30 per cent (or approximately from 
125,000 to 600,000 rubles) of the total revenue of the state. The 
weight of the evidence, however, is on the side of the lower 
percentage. What value was represented by the ruble of that 
day is to be noted from the fact that two black fox pelts in 
1623 brought 1 10 rubles. With these 1 10 rubles the owner could 
buy fifty-five acres of land, erect a good cabin, buy five horses, 
twenty head of cattle, twenty sheep, several dozen fowl, and 
still have half his capital left. The government paid the ad- 
ministrative expenses in Siberia out of the fur trade, retained 
a large surplus, and added an immense region to the state. 73 

Hand in hand with the military commander, accompanied 
by his assistants and soldiers, went the priest and the monk. 
Yermak had a "religious assistant" with him. The first church 
was founded in the ostrog of Tiumen in 1586, the first monas- 
tery at Tobolsk in 1601, and in 1620 the first diocese of Siberia 
was established with its seat at Tobolsk. (See App. 5.) What the 
private trader and trapper or the military commander with 
his "serving men" and cossacks could not do in bringing about 
pacification, the priest and monk or nun did. 7 " The govern- 

7S K Miliukov, "Gosudarstvennoe khoziaistvo Rossii v sviazi s rcformoi Petra 
Velikagor Zhurnal MJN.R, CCLXXI: 301-357; G. Kotoshikin, O Rossii v tsar- 
stvovanie Alekseia Mihhailovicha ($d ed., St. Petersburg, 1884), pp. 104-138; 
N. M, Karamzin, Istoriia gosudarstva Romishago (sd ed., 12 vols., St. Petersburg, 
1818-1829), X, 26; I. M. Kulisher, Istoriia russkogo narodnogo khoziaistva (2 vols., 
Moscow, 1925), II, 238; Fisher, op. tit., pp. 183-185, 192-196, 291-369; Butsinskii, 
Mangazeia, pp. 1-2. 

n The role of the Russian Orthodox Church and its monasteries in the history 
of Russian expansion, especially its economic and military significance, still 
awaits thorough research. Some hints of the importance of monasteries may be 
found in such brief accounts as Kizevetter's Ritsskii sever, 27 ft, and Platonov's 
Proshloe . . , 33 ff. For Siberia, see esp. N, Abramov, "Materialy dlia istorii 
khristianskago prosveshcheniia Sibiri," Zhurnal MJVJR, LXXXI:*, 15-56, and 
Sibirskaia sovetskaia entsihlopediia (3 vols., Novosibirsk, 1929-1931), III, 506- 
507; G. V, Lantzeff, Siberia in the Seventeenth Century: A Study of Colonial 
Administration (doctoral dissertation, University of California, 1938; now in 
press), MS pp. 296-339. There is an excellent opportunity to do for Russian his- 



ment did not want the native population oppressed, because 
that would mean a decline in the tribute, that is to say, the 
revenue,-but official graft and private brigandage on the part 
o the merchants and trappers brought about a fearful decline 
in the native population and woeful oppression of the sur- 
vivors. A bootleg fur trade flourished, resulting from the mo- 
nopolistic tendencies of the government. Siberia became, with 
the Russian conquest, the scene of a disastrous exploitation 
both of its most readily accessible article of wealth-furs and 
of its native population. 

When the Russians reached the Pacific, the Kurile and Aleu- 
tian islands with their fur-bearing animals beckoned them on. 
With slight modifications, fundamentally the same principle, 
historically evolved in Europe and consciously planned and 
applied in Siberia, was now applied to Russian expansion to 
North America, The sea was like a river; the key island, guard- 
ing passages between islands and dominating chains of islands, 
was an ostrog. Thus on the Aleutian chain of islands Unalaska 
and Kodiak [Kadiak] were, so to speak, ostrogs. The present 
strategic key of American defense in the Aleutians is Dutch 
Harbor (Captain's Bay). It is situated on Unalaska Island, 
which guards Umnak Pass to the west and the Akutan and 
Unimak passes to the east. The Diomede Islands in the nar- 
rowest channel between Alaska and Siberia seemed destined 
to play similar roles. What is now Alaska was, under Russian 
rule, controlled from an island on which Novo-Arkhangelsk 
or Sitka, an ostrog, was founded. 75 

tory what Professor Herbert Eugene Bolton has so brilliantly done for American 
history in his essay: "The Mission as a Frontier Institution in the Spanish 
American Colonies," Wider Horizons of American Hhtory (New York, 1939), pp. 

75 Komitet ob ustroistve russkikh amerikanskikh kolonii, Doklad KomiUba ob 
ustroist-ve russhikh-amerikamkihh kolonii (a vols., St. Petersburg, 1863-1864), I, 
9-11; JR Tikhmenev, Istoricheskoe obozrenie obmzowntia rosmsko-amerikanskoi 
kompanii i deistvii eia do nastoiashchago vremeni (% vols,, St. Petersburg, 1861- 
1863), esp. I, 15; Lantzeff, op. rit., pp. 154-155- 188-190; S. B. Okun', Romisho- 
amerikanskaia kompaniia (Leningxad, 1939)* 

Chapter V * Waterways, 
Railroads, and Land 


X^ANALS, railroads, and land highways em- 
phasize the Importance of the several factors which have been 
analyzed in previous chapters of this study. It may be stated 
that, as a rule, railroads followed along rivers and over por- 
tages; that canals were usually dug through portages; and that 
many important arterial highways, both ancient and modern, 
were built along the watersheds on the portages, A few illustra- 
tions will serve the purpose here Intended. 

The building of canals naturally came before the construc- 
tion of railroads and modern highways. There are several sys- 
tems of canals In Russia that ought to be better known than 
they have been, 1 since, In 1913, Russian river transportation 
amounted to 46,300,000 tons. 2 

1 See Ministerstvo Putei Soobshcheniia, Karta vnutrennikh vodnykh i shos- 
seinykh soobshchenii Evropeiskoi Rossii (St. Petersburg, 1894); I. Stuckenberg, 
Beschreibung alter im russischen Retches gegrabenen oder projectierten Schiff 
und flussbaren Kandle (St. Petersburg, 1841); Gershelman, Istoricheskii ocherk 
vnutrennikh vodnykh soobshchenii (St. Petersburg, 1892); A. A. Neoplkhanov, 
Russkii transport i ego planirovanie (Moscow-Leningrad, 1924), I; Gosudarstven- 
nyi rechnoi transport v 1925 (Moscow, 1925); S. V Rernstein-Kogan, Vnutrennii 
vodnyi transport (Moscow, 1927), I; Materialy po statistike putei soobshchenniia f 
issue i (Moscow, 1926); Sotsialisticheskii transport (Moscow, 1926). For maps 
see the collection (by A. V. Strel'bitskii and V. A. Bashlavin, ed. 1934?) under 
title of Karty evropeishoi chasti S.S.S.R. (1:1,500,000), and the collection of 
separate maps, Karta vostochnoi chasti S.S-S-R. (1884 publication of the Mili- 
tary Topographic Section), corrected to 1932 by the cartographic Section U.V.T. 
(1:4,200,000), and Bol'shoi sovetskii atlas mira (Moscow, 1937), plates 162163. 

3 Bol'sham sov* entsik., XI, 756. 



The first and oldest of these canals is the Upper Volga Water- 
way, created by the Tvertsa and Tsna canals (through the key 
portage of Vyshnii Volochek), which join the upper Volga with 
the Baltic. The construction of this waterway was begun in 
1703 and completed in 1709 under Peter the Great. (See maps 
2, 17; App. i, A. Volga, xxvii.) It was in practical use well into 
the nineteenth century and was the first, and for a long time 
(until the St. Petersburg-Moscow railway superseded it) the 
only connection between the Volga and the Baltic Sea. The 
waterway originated in the upper Volga, where it was supplied 
by reservoirs. The river Tvertsa (which empties into the Volga 
opposite Tver) was used to its source, where the Tvertsa or 
Upper Volga Canal, the river Tsna, and the Tsna Canal took 
up the waterway, which then led through Lake Mstino, then the 
river Msta, then through canals running parallel to and along 
the shores of Lake Ilmen, down the river Volkhov, through 
the canals along the shores of Lake Ladoga, to and through the 
river Neva to the Gulf of Finland and the Baltic. 3 It need not 
be emphasized that this waterway led directly past Torzhok 
through Vyshnii Volochek probably the best known of all 
the portages of Russia and that it connected Moscow and St. 
Petersburg by water. Its importance can hardly be overesti- 
mated. At one time early in the nineteenth century thousands 
of canal boats as many as 5000 in one year made their way 
from the Volga to the Baltic. 

Next in time and importance was the Tikhvin Waterway, 
the construction of which was debated by Peter the Great in 
1710, but which was not completed until connects the 
upper Volga through its tributary, the Mologa, with the Siaz, 
which flows into Lake Ladoga. From ancient times a trade 
route passed through this water system over the Tikhvin por- 
tage. The exact route was as follows: the Volga, the Mologa 
(as far as the mouth of the Chagodoshcha), the Chagodoshcha, 

8 See esp. Bol'shaia sov. entsik., XIV, 8s, and Entsik. slovar*, XXXIIis, 708, and 
XXXIIIa, 3878-279. 


the Goriun, Lake Vozhanskoe, the Sominka, Lake Somino, the 
Valchlna, the Tikhvin Canal (over the ancient portage made 
in part by Lakes Krupino and Lebedino), the river Tikhvlnka, 
the river Siaz, Lake Ladoga, and the river Neva. This system 
carried a heavy traffic in foodstuffs in the last half of the nine- 
teenth century, when hundreds of canalboats moved over it an- 
nually. (See map 17; App. i, A. Volga, xxx.) The St. Petersburg 
(or Leningrad-Vologda) railway in part parallels this waterway 
and actually runs through the portage at Tikhvin. 4 

The third and last waterway from the upper Volga to the 
Baltic was known as the Mariinsk System. It became the most 
important of the three waterways. Like the Tikhvin Canal, 
its building was seriously considered by Peter the Great, but 
actually it was not constructed until 1808, while the parallel 
canal between Lake Beloe (Beloozero) and Lake Onego was 
completed only in 1852. It leaves the Volga at Rybinsk by way 
of the Sheksna, passes through the canal of Lake Beloe (Beloo- 
zero) into the Kovzha, through the New Mariinsk Canal (the 
place of the portage) to the Vytegra, and down that river to 
Lake Onego or the canal along its shores; from there it follows 
the river Svir' to Lake Ladoga, and, through that lake or the 
canal along its shores, passes to the river Neva, and thence to 
the Gulf of Finland. 5 (See App. i, A. Volga, xxxii.) Just above 
where the Sheksna enters Lake Beloe (Beloozero) this system 
was united with the Northern Dvina System by means of the 
Wiirttemberg Canals constructed between 1824 and l8s8 - Tile 
Wiirttemberg Canal System leaves the Northern Dvina at the 
mouth of the Sukhona and then proceeds westward through 
the Sukhona, Lake Kubenskoe, the Porozovitsa, Lake Blago- 
veshchenskoe, the river Itkla, the canal (through the portage), 

* Entsik. slovaf, XXXIII: i, 278. 

5 Sviagintsev, Kratkoe opisanie Mariinskago vodnago puti (St. Petersburg, 
1882); Eidragevich, "Obzor sudokhodnago sostoianiia vodnago puti gertsoga 
Viurtembergskagor Zhurnal ministerstva putei soobshcheniia (St. Petersburg, 
1886); Entsik. slavar>, XVIII :s, 621-626; I. E Tiumenev, "Po Mariinskoi sisteme;' 
Istoricheskii vestnik, XCI (1903), 226-265, 655-693, 1057-1108. 

Lonji. <6- lost : from. SO 1 Crrccn7 



Lake Keshemskoe, Lake Vazerinskoe, the river Pozdyshka, Lake 
Bab'e, the canal paralleling the former river Karbatka, Lake 
Siverskoe, and the canal (through the portage) joining the 
Sheksna near the village of Topornia. 6 (See map 17; App. i, A. 
Volga, xxxiv.) 

The important portages between the Northern Dvina, Pe- 
chora, Kama, and Ob ? naturally raise questions relating to 
canal-building projects. A project to connect the rivers Chuso- 
vaia (tributary of the Kama- Volga) and Iset (tributary of the 
Tobol-Ob J ) near Ekaterinburg (now called Sverdlovsk) was de- 
veloped in the eighteenth century. (See maps 12, 13, 14, 18; 
App. i, A. Volga, IvL) The meridional folds of the Urals make 
connections possible between the tributaries of the Ob' and 
those of the Kama, Pechora, and Northern Dvina. The North- 
ern Catherina (Severo-Ekaterininskii) Canal was constructed 
between 1785 and 1822 to join the Kama and Northern Dvina 
river systems, as follows: the Northern Dvina, the Vychegda, 
the Northern KeFtma, the canal (portage), the Dzurich, the 
Southern Kel'tma, and the Kama. (See map 12; App. i, A. 
Volga, i.) This canal was closed in 1838 from lack of traffic. 
More recent developments in this region point toward its re- 
construction. Another connection, with a portage called the 
Bukhinskii Volok, joins these two basins as follows: the North- 
ern Dvina, the Vychegda, the Nem, the Bukhinskii Volok, the 
Berezovka, Lake Chusovskoe, the Visherka, the Kolva, the VI- 
shera, and the Kama. (See App. i, A. Volga, lii.) 

The Kama Pechora route begins with the Kama and contin- 
ues with theVishera, the Kolva, the Visherka, Lake Chusovskoe, 
the Berezovka, the Elovka (landing place, Ust'-Elovka), the 
Vogulka (landing places at Pupovo and Ostozh'e), the Pechor- 
skii Volok, the Volosnitsa, and ends in the Pechora. (See App. i , 
A. Volga, liii.) Along this route it is now proposed to create 
a deep-waterway system that will connect the White or Arctic 

6 Entsik. slovar*, VTI:2, 704-705; V. G. German, 'Troekt Volga-Belomorskogo 
kanala v XVII v" Istoricheskii sbornik, Ak. Nauk S.S.S.R., I (1934), 254. 




Sea with the Caspian by the construction of two reservoirs, one 
in the basin of the Kolva and the other at the sources of the 
Pechora. A short navigable canal is to be built to join them. 
The Northern Dvina- Vychegda basin is to be connected with 
this system by a canal from the Nem to the Vychegda. 7 (See 
App. i, A. Volga, lii.) 

In 1882 construction of the Ob'-Enisei Canal in Siberia was 
begun, and it was completed within the decade. This canal 
joined the Kef, a tributary of the Ob', with the Kas', a tribu- 
tary of the Enisei. (See App. i, L. Ob', viii.) Thus a Siberian 
waterway of some five thousand versts, extending from Tiumen 
to Irkutsk, was made possible. 8 

Any study of the rivers and artificial waterways of Russia 
leads to the conclusion that the central water system is that of 
the Volga, which has a basin including 1080 rivers, rivulets, 
streams, and lakes, and comes nearest to linking the European 
with the Siberian river systems. 9 It is no wonder that the next 
step in the development of the artificial waterways of Russia, 
after the removal of the capital from Leningrad to Moscow, 
was the construction of additional canals that would make 
Moscow a port accessible to all the seas into which the rivers 
of the present Soviet Union flow. 

It was in this connection that three great canals were pro- 
jected: the Moscow-Volga Canal, the White Sea-Baltic Canal, 
and the Volga-Don Canal. The completion of these waterways 
would make Moscow a port of five seas: the White, the Baltic, 
the Caspian, the Azov, and the Black. Two of these projects, 

7 V. Semenov Tian f -Shanskii,"Kamar Bol'shaia sov. entsik., XXX, 792; "Severo- 
Ekaterininskii KanalJ' Entsik. slovar*, XXXII: i, 510; P. Beliavskii, "Kama;' ibid., 
XIV: i, 123-124; and "Kamo-Pechorskii vodnyi put'/' Bol'shaia sov. entsik. } 
XXXI, 135; "Visherar ibid., XI, 357. 

8 A. I. Dmitriev-Mamonov and A. E Zdiarskii, Guide de grand chemin de fen 
trans-sibdrien (St. Petersburg, 1900), p. 249. 

9 See articles: V. K., "Volga kak vodnyi put'/' Bol'shaia sov. entsik., XII, 685- 
691; A. Rybnikov, "Istoriko-khoziaistvennyi ocherk Volzhskogo puti? ibid., pp. 
691-693; and G. Sitnikov, "Volga v ekonomicheskom otnoshenii;' ibid., pp. 693- 

m ASIA. 


GMNoia 140 



the Moscow-Volga and the White Sea-Baltic canals, have been 

The purpose of the Moscow-Volga Canal 10 is to connect the 
capital by a deep waterway as directly as possible with the Volga 
River, even though Moscow is at present situated on a tributary 
of the Oka, which in turn is a tributary of the Volga. (See App. 
i, A. Volga, xii, xix.) This canal shortens the distance to Ry- 
binsk (toward the White and Baltic seas) by noo kilometers 
and the distance to Gor'kii (toward the Caspian and Black seas) 
by no kilometers; it also creates a suitable water supply for 
Moscow and for the Moskva River. The Moscow-Volga Canal 
begins at the village of Ivan'kovo, eight kilometers above the 
mouth of the river Dubna, and turns south to the town of 
Dmitrov, where the stream is raised by five locks. Five reser- 
voirs are made by damming up the rivers Iksha, Ucha, Kliazma, 
and Khimka. Near the village Shchukino the canal, after hav- 
ing proceeded a distance of 128 kilometers, joins the river 
Moskva. At Rybinsk, now Russia's waterway center, a vast 
reservoir or lake has been created. 

The White Sea-Baltic Canal, 11 now called the Stalin Canal, 
begins at Soroka on the Gulf of Onega and extends to the river 
Vyg, then runs through the river Vyg, Lake Vyg, the river 
Telekina, Lake Telekinskoe, Lake Matko, Lake Dolgoe, and 
Vol Lake, reaching Povenets on Lake Onego through an un- 
named stream. Thereupon the already familiar routes to the 
Volga or to the Baltic may be followed by the boats. It will be 
noted, as indicated above, that Peter the Great started on his 
expedition to the Baltic in 1702 from Niukhcha (on the Gulf 
of Onega) and reached Povenets chiefly over the same route. 

The portage route of the Volga-Don Canal (described on 
pages 65, 107) is scheduled for completion in 1945. The five seas 
will therefore be linked together through the territory of the 
Soviet Union when these canals are all functioning. It would 
not be fantastic to complete the scheme by a canal between 

10 Bol'shaia sov. entsik., XL, 404-408. ^ Ibid., XXXI, 232-233. 


the Volga and the Ob 1 systems, as has been suggested at various 
times since the eighteenth century. In this way access by inland 
waterway could be realized from the heart of Russia to Lake 

When one comes to the relationship of railroads 12 to the set of 
factors under observation here, one may point to a number 
of illustrations among the many at hand. The railroad from 
Moscow to Smolensk follows the old Smolensk road, which 
passes through the leading portages between these two cities. 
These have already been described above in connection with 
Napoleon's invasion. Here the main road and the railroad vir- 
tually parallel each other. The railroad from Moscow to Rzhev 
runs through Volokolamsk-the most important portage in this 
area-and so does the highway. The railroad from Moscow to 
St. Petersburg (Leningrad), in spite of the famous instructions 
of Nicholas I to his engineers to follow a straight line, runs 
from Tver through Vyshnii Volochek, a portage the importance 
of which has been touched upon many times in this study. Here 
it meets the Tvertsa Canal. The railroad from Soroka to Med- 
vezhia Gora is parallel to the White Sea-Baltic Canal along a 
considerable part of its course. The Transsiberian Railway was 
built with a view to a relationship with the river systems of 
Siberia as well as with the Ob'-Enisei Canal. Here the rail and 
water systems were meant to supplement each other. 13 The 
Transsiberian was built in such a way as to run through certain 
portages in territory not competing directly with the Ob'-Enisei 
Canal. At Ekaterinburg, the key station in the Urals, we are 

12 See note i to this chapter. 

13 A. N. de Kotilomzine, Sibirskaia zheleznaia doroga (St. Petersburg, i903).pp. 
24-39; in French, Le Trans-sib erien (Paris, 1904), pp. 27-36; N. A. Voloshinov, 
"Sibirskaia zheleznaia dorogaj' Izvestiia imperatorskago russkago geografiches- 
kago obshchestva, XXVII (1891), 11-39, points out that there were also proposals 
to build the railway only through the portages to link up with the river traffic; 
see also D. M. M(erkhalev), Zheleznye dorogi Sibiri. Sbornik sibstatupravleniia 
(3d ed., Novo-Nikolaevsk, 1921); A. IU. Rudzit, "Magistral' Sibir'-Sredniaia 
Aziia," Sev. Aziia(iQ28) ,* Generalnyi plan rekonstruktsii narodnogo khoziaistva 
lakutskoi A.SS.R. (lakutsk, 1928) has plans for 1927-1941. 


at the portage between the Chusovaia (of the Kama-Volga sys- 
tem) and the Pyshma and the Iset (of the Tobol-Ob' system). 
From Kurgan on the Tobol to Petropavlovsk on the Ishim; 
from Petropavlovsk to Omsk on the Irtysh; from Barabinsk 
close to the Om, tributary of the Irtysh, to Novosibirsk (for- 
merly Novonikolaevsk) on the Ob'; from Achinsk on the Chu- 
lym to Krasnoiarsk on the Enisei: from Krasnoiarsk on the 
Enisei to Kansk on the Kan; from the Zima on the Oka, tribu- 
tary of the Angara, to Irkutsk on the Angara, the Transsiberian 
Railway runs through watersheds which have served or are 
serving as portages. 

The references here made to land highways, and those pre- 
viously made, as for example the Tatar trails and the later Rus- 
sian highways which developed out of them (see pages 5661), 
indicate clearly that the most important of them ran through 

VI * 

JUKE CONCLUSION to be drawn from 
this analysis extending over a thousand years of recorded his- 
tory is, I believe, obvious. Here is a process the elements of 
which are the people, rivers, and portages, the ostrogs, monas- 
teries, and furs which may be traced in Its action and develop- 
ment from tribal community to world empire. The railroad, 
canal, and motor highway have followed through the portages 
chiefly along the lines laid down by this process. 

Over these rivers and portages went representative members 
and groups of several types of society: the hunting-pastoral, the 
patriarchal, the feudal-serf, and the modern. Each, whatever 
its ideology, utilized them. These changing types could come 
and go, but the elements of the process always remained. The 
urge to the sea always dominated. 

To break up the Russian empire, as has been considered and 
attempted in the past, would be to work in opposition to basic 
forces which are creating a geographical, economic, and func- 
tional unity and which centuries of history have revealed as 
constantly operating. Here on these vast limitless plains nature 
and man have achieved most when man has understood these 
basic truths and, by adjusting himself to them, has mastered a 
new continent, Eurasia. 

To say that this process explains all there Is to Russian history 
is to claim far too much. No such claim is made for it. But that 
It explains much cannot be denied. That it fundamentally af- 
fected and indeed vitally helped to shape the course of Russian 



history seems clear. Like a newly discovered tool or invention 
it awaits use by the historian or statesman with its revealing 
explanations o the past and its prophecy of the future. 



Appendix i ^ Portages and the Important 
Russian River Systems 

HERE are Included the Important Russian river systems and most 
of the portages. No attempt has been made to make this list abso- 
lutely exhaustive; nevertheless, no other list of like character or 
degree of completeness exists, and since It may prove useful to his- 
torians and geographers It Is here included. It represents a small 
part of the Intensive work necessary before fundamental conclu- 
sions in the text could be reached. 

i. The Volga-Kamyshinka-Ilovlia-Don Portage 1 - 
R. Volga 
R, Kamyshinka 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Ilovlia 

ii. The Volga-Khupta-Riasa-Don Portage* 
R. Volga 
R. Oka 
R. Pronia 
R. Ranovaia 
R. Khupta 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Riasa 
R. Voronezh 

1 V. Semenov-Tian'-Shanskii, "Volga v fiziko-geograficheskom otnosheniir Bol'- 
shaia sov. entsik*, XII, 672-682, esp. 677: 

"Near Kamyshin the Volga is in the near vicinity (17 km.) of the upper part of 
the river Ilovlia, the tributary of the Don. The distance between the sources 
of the rivulet Kamyshinka, the tributary of the Volga, and the Ilovlia is only 
a little more than 4 km. In this place in ancient times there existed a portage 
many times used by the troops invading the land of the Khazars and moving 
from the Don basin to the Volga. In the sixteenth century the Turkish Sultan 
Selim attempted to build a canal here. A similar attempt was later made by 
Peter I. Both enterprises remained unfinished, but the remains of the work are 
still to be seen'' 

2 V. Rudakov, "Vodnye puti v drevnei Rossii*' Entsik. slovar*, VI: 2, 757758, 
esp. 758; "Wl Coxe, Travels into Poland, Russia, Sweden, and Denmark (4th ed., 
5 vols., London, 1792), I 11 * 45*-452. 

c iv:i 


iii. The Volga-Shat'-Don Portage 3 

R. Volga 
R. Shat' 

Portage (Volo k) 

iv. The Volga-Pshevka-Perevolochnia-Don Portage 4 ' 

R. Volga 
R. Zusha 
R. Pshevka 

R. Perevolochnia 
R. Liubovsha 
R. Trudy 
R. Sosna 

v. The Volga-Reseta-Snezhaf -Dnieper Portage 5 

R. Volga 


R. Zhizdra 

R. Reseta (Resseta, Roseta) 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Snezhat' 
R. Desna 
R. Dnieper 

3 V. Rudakov, loc. *cit.; Z. Khodakovskii, "Puti soobshcheniia v drevnei Rossii" 
Ritsskii istoricheskii sbornik (Moscow, 1838), I, 5, states: 

"After being informed that the tributaries of the Upa-Shat' and Shivorona 
closely approach the Don, Sviatoslav dragged his boats across the narrow space 
here and went down the Don'.' 

4 Khodakovskii, op. tit., p. 39; Rudakov, loc. cit., who mentions only the Oka- 
Zusha-Sosna-Don links. 

G N. P. Barsov, Ocherki russkoi istoricheskoi geografii (Warsaw, 1885), p. 23, 
mentions a village called Staika, on the Reseta, and another Staika on the Ugra 
River as evidence that they were landing places. Barsov deduces from the events 
of the twelfth century that the route from Novgorod Severskii into the land of 
the Viatichi went by way of Karachev, a town on the Snezhat' River. Khoda- 
kovskii, op. cit. f p. 33, points out the evidences of navigation along the river 


vi. The Volga-Ressa-Volok-Dnieper Portage* 
R. Volga 
R. Oka 
R. Ugra 
R. Ressa (Resa) 

Portage (Vo lo k) 
R. Volok 
R. Neruch 
R. Bolva 
R. Desna 
R. Dnieper 

vii. The Volga either Ugra-Osma-Dnieper, or Ugra tributaries- 
Viazma-Dnieper, or Voria-Gzhaf -Volga Portage' 1 
Variant i : Variant 2 : 

R. Volga R. Volga 

R. Oka R. Oka 

R. Ugra R. Ugra 

Ugra tributaries 

Portage ( Volok) Portage ( Volok) 

R. Osma R. Viazrna 

R. Dnieper R. Dnieper 

Variant 3: 
R. Volga 
R. Oka 
R. Ugra 
R. Voria 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Gzhat' 
R. Vazuza 
R. Volga 

6 Barsov, op. cit., p. 23, indicates a number of places whose names suggest the 
once existing routes: Stoiki and Stoi on the Bolva. Khodakovskii, op. cit., pp. 
.32~33 does not think that the route indicated in the text was very much in use 
on account of the shallowness of the rivers. 

7 For variant i see Barsov, op. tit., pp. 2021; for variants % and 3 possible 
portages see the U.S.S.R. map. 


viii. The Volga-Pro tva-Moskva-Volga Portage* 

R. Volga 
R. Oka 
R. Protva 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Moskva 
R. Volga 

Ix. The Volga-Lopamia-Pakhra- Volga Portage* 

R. Volga 


R. Lopasnia 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Pakhra 
R. Moskva 
R. Volga 

x. The Volga-Ruza-Derzha- Volga Portage 

R. Volga 
R. Moskva 
R. Ruza 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Derzha 
R. Volga 

8 Barsov, op. cit., p. 30. 

8 Loc. cit.j esp. reference to the Ipat Chronicle under 1 176. 
10 Khodakovskii, op. tit., p. 33, mentions this route as one used by an official of 
Novgorod on the way to Vladimir. 


xLThe Volgaeither Voloshna, or Istra-Lama-Volga Portage* 
Variant i: Variants: 

R. Volga 


R. Volga 

R. Moskva 

R. Moskva 

R. Ruza 

R. Istra 

R. Voloshna 

Portage (Volok 
R. Lama 

Portage (Volok 
R. Lama 

R. Shosha 

R. Shosha 

R. Volga 

R. Volga 

xii. The Volga-Skhodnia-Kliazma-Volga Portage 

R. Volga 
R. Oka 
R. Moskva 
R. Skhodnia 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Kliazma 
R. Volga 

xiii. The Volga-Iauza-Kliazma- Volga Portage 15 

R. Volga 
R. Moskva 
R. lauza 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Kliazma 
R. Volga 

11 S. M. Seredonin, Istoricheskaia geografiia (Petrograd, 1916), pp. 236-237, dis- 
cusses the significance of Volok Lamskii; Rudakov, loc. tit.; Barsov, op. tit., p. 30, 
refers to the Laurentian Chronicle under the year 1135, see Arkheograficheskaia 
Kommissiia, Polnoe sobranie russkikh letopisei (24 vols., St. Petersburg, 1846- 
1914; hereafter cited as P.S.R.L.), I, 132,* Khodakovskii, op. cit., pp. 31-32, dis- 
cusses the significance of Volok Lamskii; " Volokolamsk r Bol'shaia sov. entsik., 
XII, 785-786; K. V. Kudriashov, Russkii istoricheskii atlas (Moscow-Leningrad, 
1928), table in; Kliuchevskii, Kurs, II, 6. 

12 Barsov, loc. cit 

13 Loc. cit.; Kliuchevskii, loc. cit. 


xiv. The Volga-Buzha-Kliazma- Volga Portage 14 " 

R. Volga 
R. Oka 
R. Pra 

Series of lakes 
R. Polia 
R. Buzha 

Portage (Volok) 
R, Kliazma 
R. Volga 

xv. The Volga-Solma-Sarra-Rostouskoe Portage* 5 

R. Volga 

R. Nerl' (Bol'shaia) 

R. Solma 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Sarra (Sara) 
L. Rostovskoe 

xvi. The Volga-Solma-Malaia Nerl'- Volga Portage 

R. Volga 

R. Nerl' (Bol'shaia) 

R. Solma 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Malaia Nerl' 
R. Kliazma 
R. Volga 

xvii. The Volga-Pleshcheevo-Koloksha-Volga Portage 
R. Volga 

R. Nerl' (Bol'shaia) 
L. Somino 
R. Veska (Vioksa) 
L. Pleshcheevo 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Koloksha 
R. Kliazma 
R. Volga 

14 Khodakovskii, op. cit. f p. 35. 

16 Rudakov, loc. cit.; Barsov, op. cit., p. 31; P.S.R.L., XX, 148-149, XXIII, 65. 

16 Rudakov, loc. cit.; Barsov, loc. cit. 

17 Rudakov, lac, cit.; Barsov, op. cit. f pp. 30-31. 


xviii. The Volga-Vlena-Kliazma-Volga Portage 
R. Volga 
R. Sestra 
R. Dubna 
R. Vlena (Viela) 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Kliazma 
R. Volga 

xix. The Volga-Iakhroma-Kliazma-Volga Portage 
R. Volga 
R. Sestra 
R. lakhroma 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Kliazma 
R. Volga 

xx. The Volga-Gzhaf either Obsha-Dnieper, or Voria-Gzhat' -Volga 

Variant i: Variant 2: 

R. Volga (See Volga vii, variant 3) 

R. Vazuza 
R. Gzhat' 

Portage (Vo lok) 
R. Dnieper 

xxi. The Volga-Vazuza-Dnieper Portage- 

R. Volga 
R. Vazuza 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Dnieper 

10 Loc. cit. 

20 V. A. Brim, "Put' iz Variag v GrekiJ' Izvestiia akademii nauk SS.S.R., Ser. VII, 
Otdelenie obshchestvennykh nauk, No. 2 (1931) (pp. 201-249), p. 231; Seredonin, 
op. cit., p. 229. 

21 Barsov, op. cit., pp. 20, 28; Khodakovskii, op. tit., pp. 24-26. 


xxil : The Vo Iga- Vazuza- Viazma-Dnieper Portage 

R. Volga 
R. Vazuza 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Viazma 
R. Dnieper 

xxiii. The Volga-Peno-Zhadenie-Western Dvina Portage* 

R. Volga 

R. Selizharovka 

L. Seliger (western side) 

L. lamanets (Emenets) 

L. Sterzh 

L. Vselug 

L,. Peno 

Portage (Volok) 
L. Zhadenie 
R. Western Dvina 

xxiv. The Vblga-Runa-Pola-Lovaf Portage 24 " 

R. Volga 

R. Selizharovka 

L. Seliger 

L. Sterzh 

R. Runa 

Portage (Volok, 10 versts long) 

R. Pola 
R. Lovat' 

22 Rudakov, loc. cit. 

23 Brim, op. cit., p. 232; Barsov, op. cit., pp. 26, 28-29. 
241 Ibid., p. 28; Khodakovskii, op. cit. f pp. 33-34. 


xxv. The Volga-Seliger-Volotskoe-Lovat' Portage 2 * 
R. Volga 
R. Seiizharovka 
L. Seliger 

Portage (Volok across the hills, 5 versts long) 
L. Volotskoe 
L. Dolgoe 
L. Samlntsovo 
L. Stromilovo 
L. Istochino 
R. Chernoruchenka 
R. lavon' 
R. Pola 
R. Lovat* 

xxvi. The Volga-Kosha-Volochnia-Volga Portage^ 

R. Volga 
R. Kosha 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Volochnla 
R. Osuga 
R. Tvertsa 
R. Volga 

xxvii. The Volga-Tsna-Mstino-Msta Portage^ 

R. Volga 
R. Tvertsa 

R. Tsna 

Portage ( Volok Vyshnii Volochek) 
L. Mstlno 
R. Msta 

23 T. J. Arne, "La Suede et FOrient. Etudes archologiques sur les relations de 
la Suede et de 1'Orient pendant l'ge des VikingsJ' Archives d'Etudes Orientales, 
VIII (Uppsala, 1914), p. 16; Rudakov, loc.vit.; Barsov, op. cit., p. 27; Khodakov- 
skii, op. cit., p. 33. 

28 Ibid., p, 32. This route was of importance in communications from Torzhok 
to the region of Lake Seliger. 

27 Arne, loc. cit., is the only one who mentions the Tsna as one of the links. 
Rudakov, loc. cit.; Barsov, op. cit. 3 p. 29, emphasizes the significance of this route 
for Novgorod. The Tvertsa was a key to Novgorod. Occupation of the upper 
Tvertsa by the princes of the lower Volga always interrupted the trade of Nov- 
gorod with the Volga region; it also led to the rise of prices in Novgorod and 
sometimes to famine. Khodakovskii, op. cit., p. 26; Seredonin, op. cit., pp. 234- 
238, has a discussion of the importance of this route. Coxe, op. cit., Ill, map, 
PP- 444~445- 


xxviii. The Volga-Keza-S'ezzha-Msta Portage 28 

R. Volga 

R. Mologa 

R. Keza (Kesadra) 

Portage ( Volok near L. Navolok) 
R. S'ezzha 
R. Msta 

xxix. The Volga-Pechenovo-Msta Portage 

R. Volga 
R. Mologa 
R. Chagodoshcha 
R. PCS' 

L. Mezhvoloch'e 

L. laslno (lamnoe, according to Barsov) 
L. Sitno 
R. Sitinets 
L. Sheregodra 
R. Sheregodra 
L. Liuto 
R. Liuta 

L. Pechenovo (Pelenovo, according to Khodakovskii) 
Portage (Volok Derzhkovskii, below Borovichi) 
R. Msta 

xxx. The Volga-Chago da- Volozhba-Ladoga Portage* 

Variant i: Variant 2: 

R. Volga R. Volga 

R. Mologa R. Mologa 

R. Ghagodosheha R. Chagodoshcha 

R. Ghagoda R. Somina 

R. Valchina 

Portage (Volok Volokoslavskii or Khot'slavskii) 
R. Volozhba (Vblosha) R. Tikhvinka 
R. Siaz' (Sias') R. Siaz' 

L. Ladoga L. Ladoga 

28 Khodakovskii, op. cit., p. 32, is of the opinion that "this route enabled the 
Varangians to go to the sources of the Mologa, the banks of which are covered 
with ancient burying grounds. Through this route Novgorod communicated with 
its volost (province) of Bezhitsy" See also the map inclosed in Entsik. slovar*, 
XXI: i, pp. 236-337. 

29 Arne, loc. cit., leaves out lakes and rivers between Volok Derzhkovskii and 
the River PCS'; Rudakov, lac. cit,; Barsov, op. cit., p. 31. 

80 For variant i see Arne, loc. cit.; Rudakov, loc. cit.; Khodakovskii, op. cit. t 
p. 21; Barsov, op. cit., p. 31. Variant 2 possible portagepresent Xikhvin canal 


xxxi. The Volga-Kolp' -Lid 3 -Volga Portage* 1 
R. Volga 
R. Sheksna 
R. Suda 
R. Kolp' 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Lid' 

R. Chagodoshcha 
R. Mologa 
R. Volga 

xxxil. The Volga-Kovzha-Vytegra-Ladoga Portage** 
R. Volga 
R. Sheksna 
L. Beloe (Beloozero) 
R. Kovzha 

Portage (Volok> 7 versts long) 
R, Vytegra 

L. Onego (Onezhskoe) 
R. Svir' 
L. Ladoga 

31 Arne, loc. cit.; Khodakovskil, loc. cit.; Barsov, op. cit., pp. 31-32. 

32 Arne, loc. cit. f thinks that this was the most convenient route between the 
Volga and the Baltic Sea. Rudakov, loc. cit. f describes it also as a Volga-Baltic 
Sea route. 


xxxiii. The Volga-L. Volotskoe-L.Dolgoe-Onega Portage 

R. Volga 

R. Sheksna 

L. Beloe (Beloozero) 

R. Ukhtoma 

L. Volotskoe (Volodskoe) 

Portage (Volok Ukhtomskii) 
L. Dolgoe 

R. Ukhtoma (another river of the same name as above) 
R. Modlona 
R. Svid 
L. Lache 
R. Onega 

xxxiv. The Volga-Slavianka-Porozovitsa-Northern Dvina Portage* 4 " 

R. Volga 

R. Sheksna 

R. Slavianka 

Portage (Volok Korotkii near L. Korotkoe, con- 
nected with L. Beloe (Beloozero) through the R. 

R. Porozovitsa 

L. Kubenskoe 

R. Sukhona 

R. Northern Dvina 

33 V. G. Geiman, "Proekt Volgo-Belomorskogo kanala v XVII v." Istoricheskii 
sbornik. Akademiia nauk S.S.S.R. (Leningrad, 1934), 1, 254. Khodakovskii, op. cit. t 
p. 28, indicates that the portages Ukhtomskii and Korotkii are among the most 
ancient ones. The country beyond them was called Zavolochie (Country-beyond- 
the-Portage). These portages were the gates into the land of furs. Originally they 
were under the control of the Kievan princes (N. N. Karamzin, Istoriia gosu- 
darstva rossiiskago [ad ed., 12 vols., St. Petersburg, 1818-1829], II, nn. 138, 141). 
Later these portages were controlled by the princes of Beloozero, always faithful 
servants of the Vladimir and Moscow princes. Control over these portages by 
hostile princes seriously handicapped the Novgorodian trade (Kararnzin, op. tit., 
Ill, nn, 3, ioo 182, etc.). 

34 Arne, loc. cit.; Rudakov, op. cit. f p. 757, describes this route as a part of the 
"Zavoloch'skii vodnyi put 1 /' branching through the Mologa to the Msta and 
going by way of the Vychegda to the Kama and to the Pechora. Barsov, op. cit. f 
p. 32, speaks of the Sheksna as the "gate to the Zavolochie," and of the route given 
here as the "Zavoloch'skii put'"; Khodakovskii, op. cit., pp. 27-28. 


xxxv. The Volga-Pidma-Bolshma-Onega Portage 33 
R. Volga 
R. Sheksna 
R. Pldma 

Portage (Volok, 10 versts long) 
R. Bolshrna 

L. Vozhe or Charandskoe 
R. Svld 
L. Lache 
R. Onega 

xxxvi. The Volga-Sheksna-Perechnaia-Onega Portage 
R. Volga 
R. Sheksna 

Portage (Volok Korotkli) 
R. Perechnaia 
R. Punema 
L. Vozhe 
R. Svld 
L. Lache 
R. Onega 

xxxvii. The Volga-Sogozha-Toshna-Nort hern Dvina Portage* 7 
R. Volga 
R. Sheksna 
R. Sogozha 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Toshna 
R. Vologda 
R. Sukhona 
R. Northern Dvina 

xxxviii. The Volga-Obnora-Lezha-Northern Dvina Portage* 8 

R. Volga 
R. Kostroma 
R. Obnora 

Portage (Volo k} 
R. Lezha 
R. Sukhona 
R. Northern Dvina 

85 Barsov, loc. ei. ** A possible portage, see the U.S.S.R. map. 

m Khodakovskii, op. cit. f p. 27. ^ Idem. 


xxxix. The Volga-Monza either Lezha, or Shuia-Northern Dvina 
Portage 36 

Variant i : Variant 2 : 

R. Volga R. Volga 

R. Kostroma R. Kostroma 

R. Monza R. Monza 

Portage (Volok) Portage ( Vo lok) 

R. Lezha R. Shuia 

R. Sukhona R. Sukhona 

R. Northern Dvina R. Northern Dvina 

xl. The Volga-Tutka-Khmelnitsa-Northern Dvina Portage* 

R. Volga 
R. Kostroma 
R. Tutka 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Khmelnitsa 
R. Sukhona 
R. Northern Dvina 

xli. The Volga-Kostroma-Tolshma-Northern Dvina Portage 4 * 

R. Volga 
R. Kostroma 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Tolshma 
R. Sukhona 
R. Northern Dvina 

xlii The Volga-Iuza-Sharzhenga-Northern Dvina Portage** 

R. Volga 
R. Unzha 
R. luza 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Sharzhenga 
R. Northern Dvina 

30 For variant i see Khodakovskii, op. cit. t p. 30. Variant 2 a possible portage, 
see the U.S.S.R. map. 

40 A possible portage, see the U.S.S.R. map. 

* Idem. 

42 Khodakovskii, loc. tit., indicates a possibility of the Volga- Unzha-Iuza-Iug 
route. In this case the river Sharzhenga is the logical link, see the U.S.S.R. map. 


xliii. The Volga-Pyshchug-Kudanga-Northern Dvina Portage 43 
R. Volga 
R. Vetluga 
R. Pyshchug 

Portage (Fo/o A) 
R. Kudanga 
R. Northern Dvina 

xllv. The Volga-Vokhma-Entala-Northern Dvina Portage** 
R. Volga 
R. Vetluga 
R. Vokhma 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Entala 
R. Northern Dvina 

xlv. The Volga-Mar amitsa-Kichug-Northern Dvina Portage** 

R. Volga 
R. Kama 
R. Viatka 
R. Moloma 
R. Maramitsa 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Kichug 
R. Pushma 
R. Northern Dvina 

43 A possible portage, see the U.S.S JR., map. 

** Khodakovskii, op. cit., p. 30. The river Entala is a possible link, according 
to the U.S.S.R. map. 
45 A possible portage, see the U.S.S.R. map. 



xlvi. The Volga either Suran-Setka, or Kobra-Lunia-Northern 

Dvina Portage 4 " 

Variant i : 
R. Volga 
R. Kama 
R. Viatka 
R. Kobra 
R. Suran 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Setka 
R. Luza 
R. Northern Dvina 

Variant $: 
R. Volga 
R. Kama 
R. Viatka 
R. Kobra 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Lunia 
R. Luza 
R. Northern Dvina 

xlvii. The Volga-Volosnitsa either Nydyb, or Sy sola-Northern 

Dvina Portage 4 '' 1 

Variant i: 
R. Volga 
R. Kama 
R. Volosnitsa 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Nydyb 
R. Sysola 
R. Vychegda 
R. Northern Dvina 

Variant 2 : 
R. Volga 
R. Kama 
R. Volosnitsa 

Portage (Volok) 

R. Sysola 

R. Vychegda 

R. Northern Dvina 

xlviii. The Volga-Kama-Uzhga-Northern Dvina Portage* 

R. Volga 
R. Kama 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Uzhga 
R. Sysola 
R. Vychegda 
R. Northern Dvina 
46 Idem. 

** S. V. Bakhrushin, Ocherki po istorii kolonizatsii Sibiri v XVI i XVII vv, (Mos- 
cow, 1927-1928), p. 89. 


lix. The Volga- Vesliana-Syz-NorthernDvina Portage 
R. Volga 
R. Kama 
R. Vesliana 
R. ? (tributary of the Vesliana) 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Sysola 
R. Vychegda 
R. Northern Dvina 

The Volga-Dzhurich-Severnaia Keltma-Northern Dvina Portage 
R. Volga 
R. Kama 

R. luzhnala Keltma 
R. Dzhurich 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Severnala Keltma 
R. Vychegda 
R. Northern Dvina 

I The Volga-PU'va-Yk'Northern Dvina Portage 51 

R. Volga 
R. Kama 
R. PiFva 

Portage (Volok) 

R. Nem (Nem*, Nema) 
R. Vychegda 
R. Northern Dvina 

48 A possible portage, see the U.S.S.R. map. 

50 Rudakov, op. cit., p. 757; "Severo-Ekaterimnskii kanalj' Entsik. slovar> f 
LXXII:!, 310; V. Semenov-Tian'-Shanskii, "Kama," Bol'shaia sov. entsik., XXX, 

51 A possible portage, see the U.S.S.R. map. 


Hi. The Volga-Berezovka-N em-Northern Dvina Portage 52 

R. Volga 
R. Kama 
R. Vishera (Vishera on the pre-Soviet maps, Kolva on the 

U.S.S.R. map) 
R. Kolva 
R. Visherka 
L. Chusovskoe 
R. Berezovka 

Portage (Volok Bukhinskii) 
R. Nem (Nem', Nema) 
R. Vychegda 
R. Northern Dvina 

liii. The Volga- Vogulka-Volosnitsa-Pechor a Portage 
R. Volga 
R. Kama 

R. Vishera (see Volga Hi) 
R. Kolva 
R. Visherka 
L. Chusovskoe 
R. Berezovka 
R. Elovka 
R. Vogulka 

Portage (Volok Pechorskii) 
R. Volosnitsa 
R. Pechora 

liv. The Volga- Vishera-Lozva-Ob* Portage 5 * 

R. Volga 

R. Kama 

R. Vishera 

Portage (FoZoA) 

R, Lozva 

R. Tavda 

R Tobol 

R. Irtysh 
R. Ob' 

52 "Vishera*' Bol'shaia sov. entsik., XI, 357, says: ". . . In ancient times the Vi- 
shera was a part of the important waterway from the Kama to the Northern 
Dvina and Pechora rivers" See also "Kamsko-Pecherskii vodnyi put'," Bol'shaia 
sov. entsik., XXXI, 135; Bakhrushin, loc. cit. 

58 See references in the preceding footnote. Also E Beliavskii, "KamaJ' Entsik. 
slovar*., XIV: i, 123-124. 

64 Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp. 88-89; v - * Ogorodnikov, Ocherk istorii Sibiri do 
nachala XIX veka (3 vols. in s parts, Irkutsk-Vladivostok, 1920-1924), II, 35. 


Iv. The Volga-Mezhevaia Utka-Neiva (or Rezh?)-Ob* Portage 55 
R. Volga 
R. Kama 
R. Chusovala 
R. Mezhevaia Utka 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Rezh ? 
R. Neiva 
R. Nitsa 
R. Tura 
R. Tobol 
R. Irtysh 

Ivi. The Volga-Ghusovaia either Pyshma, or Iset-Ob 9 Portage 

Variant i : Variant 2 : 

R. Volga R. Volga 

R. Kama R. Kama 

R, Chusovaia R. Chusovaia 

Portage (Volok) Portage (Volok) 

R. Pyshma R. Iset 

R. Tobol R. Tobol 

R. Irtysh R. Irtysh 

R. Ob' R. Ob' 

Ivii. The Volga either Serebrianka, or Chusovaia Sylva-Zheravlia- 
Ob' Portage 

Variant i: Variant 2: 

R. Volga R. Volga 

R. Kama R. Kama 

R. Chusovaia R. Chusovaia 

R. Serebrianka R. Chusovaia Sylva 

Portage (Volok Portage (Volok 

Tagilskii) Tagilskii) 
R. Zheravlia R. Zheravlia 
R. Barancha R. Barancha 
R. Tagil R. Tagil 
R. Tura R. Tura 
R. Tobol R. Tobol 
R. Irtysh R. Irtysh 
R. Ob' R. Ob' 

55 Bakhrushin, op. cit. r p. 102. OT Bakhrushin, op. cit., p, 90. 

58 A possible portage, see the U.S.S.R. map. 



i. The Don-Severnyi Donets-Berestovaia-Dnieper Portage 


R. Severnyl Donets 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Berestovaia 
R. Orel' 
R. Dnieper 

ii. The Don-Severnyi Donets-Seim-Dnieper Portage 


R. Severnyl Donets 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Seim 
R. Dnieper 

ili. The Don-Oskolets-Seim-Dnieper Portage 60 


R. Sever nyi Donets 

R. Oskol 

R. Oskolets 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Seim 
R. Dnieper 

xv. The Don-Perevolochnia-Pshevka-Volga Portage 
(See Volga iv) 

v. The Don-Shat' -Volga Portage 
(See Volga iii) 

vL The Don-Riasa-Khupta- Volga Portage 
(See Volga ii) 

vii. The Don-Ilovlia-Kamyshinka- Volga Portage 
(See Volga i) 

68 Rudakov, op. cit., p. 758. 
59 Khodakovskii, op. cit.., p. 38. 
80 Loc. cit. 



i. The Dnieper-Pripet'-Seret-DniesteT Portage 1 
R. Dnieper 
R. Pripet' 
R. Styr 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Seret 
R. Dniester 

li. The Dnieper-Pina-Mukhovets-Vistula Portage 

R. Dnieper 

R. Pripet' 

R. lasolda (lazolda) 

R. Pina 

Portage (Volok where the Dnieper-Bug canal is 


R. Mukhovets 
R. Zapadnyi Bug 
R. Vistula 

iii. The Dnieper-Iasolda-Shara-Niemen Portage 6 * 

R. Dnieper 
R. Pripet* 
R. lasolda 

Portage (Volok where the Oginskii canal is now) 
R. Shara 
R. Niemen 

61 Barsov, op. cit., p. 22. The river Styr is a likely link, according to the U.S.S.R. 

62 Barsov, loc, cit., mentions the Dnieper, Pripet*, Zapadnyi Bug, and the Vis- 
tula. Other links are suggested by the present Dnieper-Zapadnyi Bug canal sys- 
tem described in "Bug Zapadnyir BoVshaia sov. entsik., VII, 767; and also in 
"Dnepr*' Entsik. slovar', X:II, 792-793. 

63 A possible and probable portage in the place of the present-day Oginskii 
canal system that is described in "Oginskii kanalj' Entsik. sloven*, XXI :II, 690, 
and in "Neman^ Bol'shaia sov. entsik*, XL, 520. 


iv. The Dnieper-Svisloch-Usha-Western Dvina Portage** 

R. Dnieper 
R. Berezina 
R. Svisloch 

Portage (Volok) 
R, Usha 
R. Viliia (Wilia) 
R. Naroch 
L. Naroch 
L. Miadel 
R. Miadelka 
R. Disna 
R. Western Dvina 

v. The Dnieper-Svisloch-Usha-Niemen Portage* 5 

R. Dnieper 
R. Berezina 
R. Svisloch 

Portage (FbZoA) 
R. Usha 
R. Viliia (Wilia) 
R. Niemen 

vi. The Dnieper-Svisloch-Ptich-Niemen Portage 
R. Dnieper 
R. Berezina 
R. Svisloch 

Portage (Volok} 
R. Ptich 
R. Usa 
R. Uzda 
R. Niemen 

vIL The Dnieper-Berezina-Ushacha-Western Dvina Portage 9 
R, Dnieper 
R. Berezina 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Ushacha 
R. Western Dvina 

84 Khodakovskii, op. cit. t p. 37. GS Loc. cit. 6a Loc. cit. 

67 Loc. cit.: this was "the shortest route between Kiev and Polotsk!' 


vili. The Dnieper-Druf-Usvitsa-Western Dvina Portage* 3 
R. Dnieper 
R. Drat' 

Portage (Volok Perevolochna) 
R. Usvitsa (Usvela) 
R. Ulla (Ula) 
R. Western Dvina 

Ix. The Dnieper-Drut'-Obol-Western Dvina Portage 

R. Dnieper 
R. Drut* 

Portage (Volok Perevoiochna) 
R. Obol 
R. Ludiesa 
R. Western Dvina 

x. The Dnieper-Luchesa-Western Dvina Portage 
R. Dnieper 

R. Veritsa (?) 
L. Luchesa (?) 
R. Luchesa 
R. Western Dvina 

68 Brim, op. cit., p. 232, refers to E G. Liubomirov's "Torgovye sviazi Rusi s 
Vostokom v VIII IX w! 1 Uchenye zapiski saratovskogo universiteta,Vol. I, issue 3 
(1923). Liubornirov suggests on the basis of numismatic findings a route through 
the town of LukomT, which is on the river Lukomlia, a tributary of the Usvitsa. 
Khodakovskii, op. cit. 3 pp. 36-37, thinks that Perevoiochna was on the Kiev- 
Polotsk route. He also says that "once in 1 158 there were more than 300 lodii 
(boats) belonging to the men of Polotsk and Drutsk near the town of Drutsk 
[on the upper Drat']; 5 and refers to Karamzin, op. cit., II, nn. 134, 386. See also 
Kudriashev, op. cit.,, map in. 

08 Brim, loc. cit.; Khodakovskii, loc. cit. 

70 See the map of the Mogilev gubernia, Entsik. slovar', XIX:II, 572-573. 


xi. The Dnieper-Katynka-Krapivka-Western Dvina Portage^ 

R. Dnieper 
R. Katynka 

Portage (VoloK) 

R. Krapivka (Lelevka or Lelekva) 
L. Kuprino 
R. Vydra 
L. Kasplla 
R. Kasplia 
R. Western Dvina 

xii. The Dnieper-Khvost-Vydra-Western Dvina Portage 

R. Dnieper 
R. Khvost 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Vydra 
L. Kasplia 
R. Kasplia 
R. Western Dvina 

xiii. The Dnieper- Votria-Elsha-Western Dvina Portage 
R. Dnieper 
R. Vop' 
R. Votria 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Eisha 
R. Mezha 
R. Western Dvina 

xiv. The Dnieper-Ob sha-Gzhat'- Volga Portage 
(See Volga xx) 

xv. The Dnieper-Vazuza-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxi) 

71 Brim, loc. tit.; Arne, op. cit., p. 15, locates the portage near the village of 
Lodyzhnitsa or Lodeinitsa, west of Smolensk, close to Gnezdovo; Seredonin, op. 
cit., p. 229; Barsov, op. cit., p. 24; S. M. Solov'ev, Istoriia Rossii s drevneishihh 
vremen (29 vols. in 7, St. Petersburg, 1894-), 1, 16; Khodakovskii, op. cit., pp. 13- 
14, who refers to the treaty of Mstislav of Smolensk with Riga and Gotland in 
1229 (5.G.G. i >., II, 3-4), where this portage is mentioned; Kudriashov, loc. cit. 

72 Kudriashov, loc. cit. 

78 Loc. cit.; Brim, op. cit., p. 232; Seredonin, op. cit. f p. 229. 


xvl. The Dnieper- Viazma- Vazuza- Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxii) 

xvli. The Dnieper-Viazma-Ugra tributaries-Volga Portage 
(See Volga vil, variant 2) 

xvili. The Dnieper-Osma-Ugra- Volga Portage 
(See Volga vii, variant i) 

xix. The Dnieper- Volok-Ressa- Volga Portage 
(See Volga vi) 

xx. The Dnieper-Snezhat'-Reseta-Volga Portage 
(See Volga v) 

xxi. The Dniepereither Iput' , or Oster-Desna-Dnieper Portage 

Variant i: Variant s: 

R. Dnieper R. Dnieper 

R. Sozh R. Sozh 

R. Iput* R. Oster 

Portage ( Volok) Portage ( Volok) 

R. Desna R. Desna 

R. Dnieper R. Dnieper 

xxii. The Dnieper-Seim-Oskolets-Don Portage 
(See Don iii) 

xxiii. The Dnieper-Seim-Severnyi Donets-Don Portage 
(See Don ii) 

xxiv. The Dnieper-Berestovaia-Severnyi Donets-Don Portage 
(See Don i) 

xxv. The Dnieper- Volch'ia-Kalmius-Sea of Azov Portage 

R. Dnieper 
R. Samara 
R. Voich'ia 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Kalmius 
Sea o Azov 

74 Barsov, op. cit. y pp. 22-23, points out that in the twelfth century a route went 
by way of the Sozh-Desna to the Volga; this route was called "na Radimiche" and 
is mentioned in the Ipat Chronicle under 1169, RS.RJ.., II, 97. 

Rudakov, op. cit.> p. 758; Barsov, op. cit. 3 p. 21. 


xxvi. TheDnieper-Volch'iorKrynkarSea of Azov Portage 

R. Dnieper 
R. Samara 
R. Volch'ia 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Krynka 
R. Mius 
Sea of Azov 

xxvii. TheDnieper-Konskaia-Berda-Sea of Azov Portage" 

R. Dnieper 
R. Konskaia 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Berda 
Sea of Azov 

i. The Western Dvina-Disna-Miadel-Niemen Portage 78 

R. Western Dvina 
R. Disna 

Portage (Volok) 
L. Miadel 
L. Naroch 
R. Naroch 
R. Viliia (Wilia) 
R. Niemen 

ii. The Western Dvina-Usha-Svisloch-Dnieper Portage 

(See Dnieper iv) 
iii. The Western Dvina-Ushacha-Berezina-Dnieper Portage 

(See Dnieper vii) 
iv. The Western Dvina-Usvitsa-Drut'-Dnieper Portage 

(See Dnieper viii) 

76 Rudakov, toe. cii.; Barsov, toe. f. 

77 D. F. Shcheglov, "Pervyia stranitsy russkoi istoru, Zhurnal M.N.K (5t. Peters- 
burg) ,*CLXXXIV (1874) (221-269), 254- 

78 Khodakovskii, op. tit., p. 37. 


v. The Western Dvina-O b ol-Drut' -Dnieper Portage 
(See Dnieper ix) 

vi. The Western Dvina-Luchesa-Dnieper Portage 
(See Dnieper x) 

vil. The Western Dvina-Krapiuka-Katynka-Dnieper Portage 

vili. The Western Dvina-Vydra-Khvost-Dnieper Portage 
(See Dnieper xii) 

ix. The Western Dvina-Elsha-Votria-Dnieper Portage 
(See Dnieper xiii) 

x. The Western Dvina-Zhadenie-Peno-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxiii) 

xL The Western Dvina-Zhadenie-Luchanskoe-Lovaf Portage 

R* Western Dvina 
L. Zhadenie (Zhadore) 
R. Vologda? 
L. Otolovo ? 

Portage (Volok) 
L. Luchanskoe 
R. Pola 
R, Lovaf 

xii. The Western Dvina-Vydbino-Pola-Lovat* Portage 

R. Western Dvina 

R. Toropa 

L. Boino 

L. Brosno 

L. Luchanskoe 

L. Vydbino 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Pola 
R. Lovat' 

79 Khodakovskii, op. tit., p. 15; Barsov, op. cit., p. 25, 

80 Brim, op. tit., p. 232; Seredonin, op. cit., pp. 228-229. 


xiii. The Western Dvina-Zhelno-Serezha-Lovaf Portage 81 

R. Western Dvina 
R. Toropa 
L. Zhelno 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Serezha 
R. Kunia 
R. Lovat' 

xiv. The Western Dmna-Dvin 'e~Kunia-Lovat } Portage** 

R. Western Dvina 
R. Dvinka 
L. Dvin'e 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Kunia 
R. Lovat' 

xv. The Western Dvina-Usviat-Kunia-Lovat' Portage** 

R. Western Dvina 
R. Zhizhitsa 
L. Zhizhitskoe 
R. Usviat (Usviacha) 
Portage (Volo k) 
R. Kunia 
R. Lovat' 

a Barsov, op. tit., pp. 25-26, thinks that this route was used in 1168-69 by 
Prince Rostislav Mstislavovich in his expedition from Novgorod against Smo- 
lensk. He disagrees with Khodakovskii, the latter maintaining that this route 
was also used in the events of 1234. Barsov refers to the ist Novgorodian Chron- 
icle, P.S.R.L., III, 49. Khodakovskii, op. tit. f pp. 13-14, refers to Karamzin, op. 
tit., III, n. 343, See also Kudriashov, loc, tit,; Solov'ev, op. cit. f I, 16. 

82 Barsov, op. tit., p. 26, calls this route a branch of the "Variazhskii put'." He 
refers to the ist Novgorodian Chronicle, P.S.R.L., III, 49, proving that this was 
the road used by the Lithuanians in the invasion of 1234. The chronicler points 
out Klin as the place where the Lithuanians retreated. Klin served as a center of 
communication between the Lovat' and the region of the Dvina. The town Zhi- 
zhichi, situated on this route, was already in the twelfth century one of the 
richest in this region. It paid very considerable taxes (of which 130 grivny went 
to the prince) and feudal fees, as is shown by the charter of the bishopric of 
Smolensk, 1150. 

83 Brim, op. cit., p. 232; Seredonin, op. tit., p. 228. 


xvi. The Western Dvina-Usmen-Lovaf Portage 4 

R. Western Dvina 
R. Usvlat (Usviacha) 
L. Usviat 
L. Usmen 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Lovat' 

xvii. The Western Dvina-Ozerishche-Emenets-Lovat* Portage 1 
R. Western Dvina 
R. Obol 
L. Ozerishche (Ezerishche) 

Portage (Volok) 
L. Odrovo ? 
L. Emenets 
R. Emenka 
L. Nevel 
R. Emenka [sic] 
L. Molosno 
L. Kamshino 
R. Lovat* 

xviii. The Western Dvina-Usha either Nasva, or Udmika-Lovaf 

Variant i : Variant 2: 

R. Western Dvina R. Western Dvina 

R. Drisa R. Drisa 

R. Usha (Ushcha) R. Usha (Ushcha) 

Portage (Volok) Portage (Volok) 

R. Nasva (Nosva) R. Udralka 

R. Lovat' R. Lovat' 

xix. The Western Dvina-Usha-Velikaia Portage* 1 

R. Western Dvina 

R. Drisa 

R. Usha (Ushcha) 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Velikala 

84 Brim, loc. cit.; Seredonin, loc. cit. 

85 Barsov, op. cit. y pp. 24-25, refers to the ist Novgorodian Chronicle, under 
1185, RS.R.L., Ill, 19, and to the Ipat Chronicle, under 1178, P.S.R.L., II, 120. 
See also Brim, op. cit.,, p. 231; Seredonin, loc. cit. 

86 Brim, op. cit., p. 226; Khodakovskii, op. cit., pp. 30-31. 

87 Brim, loc. cit.; Khodakovskii, loc. cit. 



i. The Velikaia-Virts-Pernava Portage 88 

R. Velikaia 

L. Pskovskoe (Velikoe) 

L. Chudskoe (Peipus) 

R. Embakh (Omovzha) 

L. Vlrts 

R. Paala ? (See the U.S.S.R. map) 

Portage (Volok) 

R. Kavast ? (See the U.S.S.R. map) 
R. Pernava 

ii. The Velikaia-Cherekha either Uza, or Sudoma-Shelon* Portage** 
Variant i: Variant 2: 

R. Velikaia R. Velikaia 

R. Cherekha R. Cherekha 

Portages (BoFshoi Volochek and Malyi Volochek) 
R. Uza R, Sudoma 

R. Shelon' R. Shelon' 

iii. The Velikaia either Nasva, or Udraika-Lovat* Portage 

Variant i: Variant 2: 

R. Velikaia R. Velikaia 

Series of lakes Series of lakes 

Portage ( Vo lok) Portage ( Vo lok) 

R. Nasva R. Udraika 

R. Lovat' R. Lovat' 

iv. The Velikaia-Usha-Western Dvina Portage 
(See Western Dvina xix) 

88 Rudakov, op. cit., p. 758; Brim, loc. tit.; Khodakovskii, op. tit., p. 21. 
80 Laurentian Chronicle, ES.R,L. f I, 63; ist Novgorodian Chronicle, P.S.R.L., 
III, 85; Rudakov, op. cit. f p, 758; Barsov, op. cit. y p. 27; Kudriashov, loc. cit. 
80 Brim, op. cit., p. 226; Khodakovskii, op. cit. f pp. 30-31. 


i. The Shelori either Hotynka, or Soba-Luga Portage^ 

Variant i: Variants: 
R. Sheion' R. Shelon' 

R. Mshaga R. Mshaga 

R. Hotynka R. Soba 

Portage ( Vo lok) Portage ( Vo lok) 

R. Luga R. Luga 

ii. The Shelon' either Uza, or Sudoma-Gherekha-Velikaia Portage 


i. The Lovat'-Volotskoe-Seliger-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxv) 

ii. The Lovat'-Pola-Runa- Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxiv) 

iii. The Lovat'-Luchanskoe-Zhadenie-Western Dvina Portage 
(See Western Dvina xi) 

iv. The Lovat'-Pola-Vydbino-Western Dvina Portage 
(See Western Dvina xii) 

v. The Lovat'-Serezha-Zhelno-Western Dvina Portage 
(See Western Dvina xiii) 

vi. The Lovat'-Kunia-Usviat-Western Dvina Portage 
(See Western Dvina xv) 

vii. The Lovat'-Kunia-Dvin'e-Western Dvina Portage 
(See Western Dvina xiv) 

viii. The Lovat'-Usmen-Western Dvina Portage 
(See Western Dvina xvi) 

81 Arne, op. cit., p. 15; Brim, loc. cit.; Barsov, loc. vit.; Khodakovskii, op. cit., 
pp. 18-19, mentions the fact that "the right tributary of the Luga, Oredezh, was 
navigable as far as Lake Tesovol' Khodakovskii hints at the possibility of a Luga- 
Oredezh-Tesovo-Neva portage. 


ix. The Lovaf-Emenets-Ozerishche-Western Dvina Portage 
(See Western Dvina xvii) 

x. The Lovat' -either Nasva, or Udraika-Usha-Western Dvina 

(See Western Dvina xviii) 


L The Msta-Pechenovo- Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxix) 

ii. The Msta-S'ezzha-Keza- Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxviii) 

iii. The Msta-Mstino-Tsna-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxvii) 


L The Onega-Voloshozero-Chereva-Ladoga Portage 

R. Onega 

R. Kena 

L. Kenozero 

R. Podia 

L. Pochozero 

R. Voloshka (Volosha) 

L. Voloshozero (Voloshevo, Volotskoe) 

Portage (Volok, 6 versts long) 
R. Chereva 
R. Vodla 
L. Onego 
R. Svir 1 
L. Ladoga 

82 S. E Platonov, Proshloe russkago severa (St. Petersburg, 1923), p. 15; Ruda- 
kov, loc. cit. f states that "the Novgorodians knew this route in 1137. It preserved 
its importance to the beginning of the nineteenth century for transit of goods 
from Arkhangelsk by way of the Onega!' 


ii. The Onega-Lache-Vytegm-Ladoga Portage 03 

R. Onega 
L. Lache 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Vytegra 
L. Onego 
R. Svir' 
L. Ladoga 

iiL The Onega-Dolgoe-Volotskoe-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxxiii) 

iv. The Onega-Bolshma-Pidma-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxxv) 

v. The Onega-Perechnaia-Sheksna-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxxvi) 

vL The Onega-Voloshka-Vel* -Nor them Dvina Portage** 

Variant i : Variant 2 : 

R. Onega R. Onega 

R. Voloshka R. Voloshka 

Portage ( Vo lok) Portage ( Vo lok) 

R.VeF R.Vel 7 

R.Vaga R.Vaga 

R. Kokshenga 

R. Northern Dvina R. Northern Dvina 

Variant 3: 
R. Onega 
R. Voloshka 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Ust'ia 
R. Northern Dvina 

03 Platonov, loc. cit. 

91 M. Edemskii, "O starykh torgovykk putiakh na severer Zapiski russkago ar- 
kheograficheskago obshchestva (St. Petersburg), IX (1913) (3$-$2), 61-62. 


vii* The Onega-Emtsa-Northern Dvina Portage** 
R. Onega 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Emtsa 
R. Northern Dvina 


i. The Northern Dvina-Emtsa-Qnega Portage 
(See Onega vii) 

ii The Northern Dvina~Vel*-Voloshka Portage 
(See Onega vi) 

iii. The Northern Dvina-Kokshenga-Sukhona-Northern Dvina 
Portage" 9 

R. Northern Dvina 

R. Vaga 

R. Kokshenga 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Sukhona 
R, Northern Dvina 

iv. The Northern Dvina-Porozovitsa-Slavianka- Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxxiv) 

v. The Northern Dvina-Toshna-Sogozha- Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxxvii) 

vi. The Northern Dvina-Lezha either Obnora, or Monza- Volga 

(See Volga xxxviii and xxxix, variant i) 

vii. The Northern Dvina-Shuia-Monza- Volga Portage 
(See Volga xxxix, variant 2) 

viii. The Northern Dvina-Khmelnitsa-Tutka-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xl) 

ix. The Northern Dvina-Tolshma-Kostroma- Volga Portage 
(See Volga xli) 

95 Platonov, loc. cit.; Khodakovskii, op. cit., p, 29. M Edemskii, op. cit., p. 55. 


x. The Northern Dvina-Sharzhenga-Iuza-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xlii) 

xl. The Northern Dvina-Kudanga-Pyshchug-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xlili) 

xii. The Northern Dvina-Entala-Vokhma-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xliv) 

xili. The Northern Dvina-Kichug-Maramitsa-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xlv) 

xiv. The Northern Dvina- Viled'-Sysola-Northern Dvina Portage* 

R. Northern Dvina 
R. Vychegda 
R. Viled' 

Portage (Volok Viledskii) 
R. Sysola 
R. Vychegda 
R. Northern Dvina 

xv. The Northern Dvina either Setka~Suran> or Lunia-Kobra- 
Volga Portage 

(See Volga xlvi) 

xvl. The Northern Dvina either Sysola, orNydyb-Volosnitsa-Volga 

(See Volga xlvii) 

xvii. The Northern Dwna-Uzhga-Kama-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xlviii) 

xviii The Northern Dvina~Syz-Vesliana-Volga Portage 
(See Volga xlix) 

xlx. The Northern Dvina-Severnaia Keltma-Dzhurich-Volga 

(See Volga 1) 
67 Bakhrushin, op. cit. f p. 89, describes this portage as a route to the Kama. 


xx. The Northern Dvina-Yk-Pil'va- Volga Portage 
(See Volga li) 

xxi. The Northern Dvina-Nem-Berezovka-Volga Portage 
(See Volga lii) 

xxii. The Northern Dvina-Iuzhnaia Mylva-Severnaia 
Mylva-Pechora Portage* 8 

R. Northern Dvina 

R. Vychegda 

R. luzhnaia Mylva (Myl'ia) 

Portage (FoM) 
R. Severnaia Mylva (Myl'ia) 
R. Pechora 

xxiii. The Northern Dvina-Govniukha-Ukhta-Pechora Portage 

R. Northern Dvina 

R. Vychegda 


R. Shomvukva (ancient Tetera) 

R. Govniukha 

Portage (Volok Vymskii; there is a village 

R. Ukhta 
R. Izhma 
R. Pechora 

xxiv. The Northern Dvina-Pinega-Kuloi-White Sea 100 

R. Northern Dvina 
R. Pinega 

Portage (Volok Pinezhskii) 
R. Kuloi 
White Sea 

68 Rudakov, op. tit, p. 757. 

ft9 Bakhrushin, op. cit. t p. 61; A. A. Titov (ed.) , Sibir* v XVII veke (Moscow, 
1890), p. 51; Ogorodnikov, Ocherki istorii Sibiri, II, 8. 
100 Bakhrushin, op. tit., p. 62. 



i. The Pechora-Lake "(name unknown )-Peza-Mezen Portage 

Variant i : Variants: 

R. Pechora R. Pechora 

R. Tsilma R. Tsilma 
R. Chirka 
R. Rubikha 

Lake (unknown) Lake (unknown) 

Portage (Volok Portage (Volok 

Pezskii) Pezskii) 

R. Peza R. Peza 

R. Mezen R. Mezen 

ii. The Pechora-Ukhta-Govniukha-Northern Dvina Portage 
(See Northern Dvina xxiii) 

iii. The Pechora-Severnaia Mylva-Iuzhnaia Mylva-Northern Dvina 

(See Northern Dvina xxii) 

iv. The Pechora-Volosnitsa-Vogulka-Volga Portage 
(See Volga liii) 

v. The Pechora-Ilych-Sosva-Ob' Portage 
R. Pechora 
R. Ilych 

Portage (Vo lo k) 
R. Sosva 

vi. The Pechora-Shchugor either latriia, or Vol'ia~Sosva-Ob' 

Variant i: Variant 2: 

R. Pechora R. Pechora 

R. Shchugor R. Shchugor 

Portage ( Volok) Portage ( Volok) 

R. latriia R. VoFia 
R. Sygva 
R. Kirtas 

R. Sosva R. Sosva 
R. Ob* R. Ob' 

101 Loc. cit. 102 Ibid., p. 63; Rudakov, loc. cit. 

108 For variant i see Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp. 63, 77; also the U.S.S.R. map; 
P. N. Butsinskii, Zaselenie Sibiri i byt eia pervykh nasel'nikov (Kharkov, 1889), 
pp. 178-179. For variant 2, see Rudakov, loc. cit* 


vii. The Pechora-Elets-Sob'-Ob' Portage 

R. Pechora 

R. Usa (ancient Sob'-Musa) 

R. Elets 

Portage (Volok Kamennyi) 
R. Sob' 


i. The Ob'-Sob'-Elets-Pechora Portage 
(See Pechora vii) 

ii. The Ob'-Sosva~Ilych-Pechora Portage 
(See Pechora v) 

iii. The Ob' either Vol'ia, or latriia-Shchugor-Pechora Portage 
(See Pechora vi) 

iv. The O b'-Lozva- Vishera- Vo Iga Portage 
(See Volga liv) 

v. The Ob'-Zheravlia either Serebrianka, or Chusovaia 
Sylva- Volga Portage 

(See Volga Ivii) 

vi. The Ob'-Neiva (or Rezh?)-Mezhevaia Utka-Volga Portage 
(See Volga Iv) 

vii. The Ob' either Pyshma, or I$et~Chusovaia- Volga Portage 
(See Volga Ivi) 

104 Bakhrushm, op. cit., pp. 62, 75; Rudakov, loc. cit.; Titov, op. cit., pp. 50-51; 
Butsinskii, op. cit. f p. 176. 


vlii. The Ob' either Ket*, or Kern, or Kas' -Enisei Portage 5 

Variant i : Variant 2 : 

R. Ob' R. Ob* 

R. Kef R. Ket* 

Portage (Volok Portage (Volok 

Makovskii) Makovskii) 
R. Toma 

R. Kern R. Kas' 

R. Enisel R. Enlsei 

Variant 3: 
R. Kef 

Portage (Volok Makovskii) 
R. Enisei 

ix. The O b y - Tym-Sym-Enisei Portage* 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Sym 
R. Enisei 

x. The Ob'-Volochanka-Volochanka-Enisei Portage 1 
R. Volochanka 

Portage (Volok Eloguiskii, 15 versts long) 
R. Volochanka (same name as above, otherwise known as 

R. Elogui 
R. Enisei 

105 For variant i, see Bakhrushin, op. cit. } p. 112; G. P. Mueller, "Siblrskaia 
istoriiar Ezhemesiachnyia sochineniia . . . akademii nauk (St. Petersburg, March, 
1764), pp. 207208. 

For variant 2, see the map of the U.S.S.R, for a possible portage. 

For variant 3, see Bakhrushin, op. cit. y pp. 110-111; Titov, op. cit., pp. 30, 
46-47, 81-82; Spafarii, "Puteshestvie chrez Sibir . . . Nikolaia Spafariia v 1675 
...,'* Zapiski imperatorskago russkago geograficheskago obshchestva po otdele- 
niiu etnografii (St. Petersburg), X, no. i (1882), pp. 67-83. 

106 Bakhrushin, op. cit. f p. 1 14; Mueller, "Sibirskaia istoriiar Ezhemesiachnyia 
sochineniia . . . (June, 1764), pp. 512-513. 

107 Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 112; Titov, op. cit.> p. 36. 


xi. The Ob'-Krugloe-Volochanka-Enisei Portage* 08 


Gulf of Ob' (Obskaia Guba) 

Gulf of Taz (Tazovskaia Guba) 


R. Volochanka (Volochaika) 

L. Krugloe 

Small streams 

Portage (Volok Eniselskii) 
R. Volochanka (same name as above) 
R. Tiirukhan 
R. Enisei 


i. The Enisei-Volochanka-Krugloe-Ob' Portage 
(See Ob' xi) 

ii. The Enisei- Volochanka- Volochanka-O b* Portage 
(See Ob' x) 

iii. The Enisei-Sym-Tym-Ob' Portage 
(See Ob' ix) 

iv. The Enisei either Kas', or Kem, or Ket'-Ob* Portage 
(See Ob' viii) 

108 Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp. 114, 120; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 47; Titov, op, 
cit. f pp. 21-22, 37, uses the name Volochaika instead of Volochanka both times. 


v. The En isei-Era k le ia-Ingo da- A mur Portage 

R. Enisei 

R. Verkhniaia Tunguska (Upper Tuiiguska) (called An- 
gara near the source) 

L. Baikal 

R. Selenga 

R. KMlka 

L. Irgen 

L. Erakleia 

Portage (Vblok Irgenskil) 

R. Ingoda 

R. Shilka (formed by the junction of the Ingoda and 

R. Amur 

vi. The Enisei-Ilim~Muka~Lena Portage 
R. Enisei 

R. Verkhniaia Tunguska 
R. Him 

Portage (Volok Lenskii) 
R. Muka 
R. Kupa 
R. Kuta 
R. Lena 

vii. The Enisei-Nizhniaia Tunguska-Kulenga-Lena Portage^ 

R. Enisei 

R. Nizhniaia Tiinguska (Lower Tiinguska) 

Portage (Volok Chichuiskii or Tungusskii) 
R. Kulenga (Kulinga) 
R. Lena 

100 "Report of the military commander (voevoda) Pashkov, 1652!' D.AJ., Ill, 
343-345 ; "Report of the lesser noble Beketov, 1653^' D.AJ. y III, 390-396; "Instruc- 
tions to the lesser noble Kolesnikov, 1656? J>,AJ. f IV, 53; Spafarii, op. cit., pp. 
126-127; Bakhrushin, op. cit.> pp. 136-137; Titov, op. cit., pp. 31, 47, 106; J. E. 
Fischer, Sibirskaia istoriia . . . (St. Petersburg, 1774), p. 566; V. K. Andrievich, 
Istoriia Sibiri (in 2 parts, St. Petersburg, 1889), I, 81-82; Ogor-odnikov, op. cit., 
II, 71-72. 

110 "Petition of serving men, 1640;' D.A.L, II, 172-174; "Report of the military 
commander (voevoda) Golovin, 1640*' D.AJ. f II, 238-239: "Description of rivers, 
1640-1641;* D.AJ., II, 243-248; "Report of the military commanders (voevodas) 
Pushkin and Suponev, 1645^' ZMX, III, 37-40; "Instructions to Golovin, 1638;' 
RJJS. f II, 961-972; Fischer, op. tit., p. 354; Bakhrushin, op. cit. f pp. 123-126. 

m "Report of the military commander (voevoda) Golovin, 1640^' D~A.I. f II, 
248-249; "Report of the military commanders (voevodas) Golovin and Glebov, 
1641 r D.AJ., II, 252-254; Bakhrushin, op. cit,, p. 128; Fischer, op. cit. f pp. 360- 
361; Ogorodnikov, op. cit.> II, 48. 


viii. The Enisei-Titeia-Ghurka-Lena Portage 

R, Enisei 

R. NizhniaiaTunguska 

R. Titeia 

Portage (Volok Viliuiskii) 
R. Churka 
R. Chona 
R. Viliui 
R. Lena 

ix. The Enisei-Piasina-Khatanga Portage* 

R. Enisei 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Piasina 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Khatanga 


i. The Lena-Churka-Tlteia-Enisei Portage 
(See Enisei viii) 

ii. The Lena-Kulenga-Nizhriiaia Tunguska-Enisei Portage 
(See Enisei vii) 

iii. The Lena-Muka-Ilim-Enisei Portage 
(See Enisei vi) 

iv. The Lena-Niugzi-Urka- Amur Portage^ 

R. Lena 

R. Olekma 

R. lugir 

R. Niugzi (Nuigchi, Niimzi, Niunchi, Niuga, Niuzia) 

Portage {Volok Tugirskii) 
R. Urka (Ura, Ui) 
R. Amur 

113 Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp. 123, 127; Fischer, op. dt. f p. 30; Ogorodnikov, op. 
tit., II, 47. 

113 Ogorodnikov, loc. cit. 

314 "Questioning of ... Vizhevtsov and . . . Poiarkov, 1647^' D.AJ. f III, 102-104; 
"Instructions to . . . Prokof'ev, 1652*' D.A.L, III, 352-354; "Questioning of... 
Andreev, 1652^' D.A.I., III, 371-373; Spafarii, op. tit., pp. 133, 164; Titov, op. cit., 
p. 33; Bakhrushin, op. cit. } p, 134; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 87. 


v. The Lena-N iugzi-Amazar- Amur Port age 2 

R. Lena 

R. Olekma 

R. Tugir 

R. Niugzi (NiugchI, Niunzi, Niunchi, Niuga, Nfuzla) 

Portage (Volok Tugirskii) 
R. Amazar 
R. Amur 

vi. The Lena-Katym-Zeia-Amur Portage 1 
R. Lena 
R. Aldan 
R. Tontora 
R. Katym 

Portage (Volok Aldanskii) 
R. Zeia 
R. Amur 

vii. The Lena-Niuemka-Brianda- Amur Portage 

R. Lena 
R. Aldan 
R. Uchur 
R. Gonom 
R. Niuemka 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Brianda (Brianta) 
R. Zeia 
R. Amur 

viii. The Lena-Volochanka-Siksha-Ul'ia Portage** 

R. Lena 

R. Aldan 

R. Maia 

R. Volochanka (modern Mati?) 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Siksha (modern Dasyksha?) 
R. Ul'ia 

115 "Petition of Maksimov, 1657? D.A.I., IV, 94-95; Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 134. 
110 Spafarii, op. cit., p. 165; Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 135. 

117 "Acts about the voyage of ... Poiarkov, 1646^ D.AJ., Ill, 50-60; "Question- 
ing of ... Vizhevtsov and . . . Poiarkov, 1647^ -D-4 JT* III, 102104; "Instructions 
to ... Poiarkov, 1643" Chteniia v imperatorskom obshchestve istorii i drevnostei 
rossiiskikh (Moscow, 1861), I, pt. 5, 1-14. 

118 "Acts about the voyage of. . .Poiarkov, 1646? DA. I., Ill, 50-60; "Reports 
of ... Epishev, 1652? D.AJ., Ill, 332-343; Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 139. 


ix. The Lena-Iudoma either Bludnaia, or Urak-Okhota Portage 

Variant i : Variant 2 : 

R. Lena R. Lena 

R. Aldan R. Aldan 

R. Maia R. Maia 

R. ludoma R. ludoma 

Portage (ludomskii Krest or Volok Okhotskii) 
R. Bludnaia 

R. Urak R. Urak 

Portage ( Volok) Portage ( Volok) 

R. Okhota R. Okhota 

x. TheLena-Iana Portage 

R. Lena 

Portage (Volok across the Verkhoiansk Mountains) 
R. lana 


i. The lana-Lena Portage 
(See Lena x) 

ii. The lana-Indigirka Portage 1 

R. lana 

Portage (Volo k) 
R. Indigirka 


i. The Kolyma-Uiagan-Penzhina Portage* 

R. Kolyma 

R. Oemokon (Omolon) 

R. Uiagan 

Portage (Volok Penzhinskii) 
R. Penzhina 

110 "Instructions to Skvortsov, i66oj' D.A.I., IV, 200-? 14; "Report of ... Maksi- 
mov and . . . Antipin, 1715^ Arkheograficheskaia Kommissim } Pamiatniki sibirskoi 
istorii XVIII veka (2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1885), II, 62-64; "Distances between 
Siberian towns, 1724," ibid., II, 461-468. 

150 Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 56. 


m Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 129; DAI., VIII, 175. 


ii. The Kolyma-Aniui-Anadyr Portage^ 

R. Kolyma 
R. Aniui 

Portage (Volok) 

R. Anadyr 


i. The Amur-Ingoda-Erakleia-Enisei Portage 
(See Enisei v) 

ii. The Amur-Urka-Niugzi-Lena Portage 
(See Lena iv) 

iiL The Amur-Amazar-Niugzi-Lena Portage 
(See Lena v) 

iv. The Amur-Zeia-Katym-Lena Portage 
(See Lena vi) 

v. The Amur-Brianda-Niuemka-Lena Portage 
(See Lena vii) 


i. TheMezen GulfChizha-Chesha-Cheshskaia Gulf Portage** 

Mezen Gulf 
R. Chizha 

Portage (Volok Cheshskii) 
R. Chesha 
Cheshskaia Gulf 

ii. The Kara Gulf-Mutnaia-Zelenaia-Gulf of Ob* Portage 

Kara Gulf 
R. Mutnaia 

Portage (Volok) 
R. Zelenaia 

Gulf of Ob* 

123 Bakhrashin, loc. cit.; "Report of Dezhnev and Semenov, 1655;* D-AI-, IV, 

^RJJB., II, 1091; Bakhrushin, op. cit. f p. 80. 
125 R.I.B., II, 1051-1052 ff.; Bakhrushin, op. tit., p. 82. 

Appendix 2 j*C Extracts from the Smolensk 
Trade Codes of 1229 and 1274, Illustrating 
the Regulations in Regard to the Portage 
from the Western Dvina to the Dnieper 1 

Code of 12,2,9 


I the Bailiff [of the Portage] 
should hear of the arrival of a 
Latin merchant, he is to send 
men with wagons (kola) to 
transport the goods [across the 
Portage], and not detain the 
merchant, [for] in this, damage 
might be caused. 

Code o 


a. If Latin and Smolensk 
merchants should arrive at the 
Portage [at the same time], lots 
should be drawn to determine 
who should be transported first 
[across the Portage] to Smo- 

b. If men should arrive from 
other lands, they are to be 
transported [across the Portage] 

If the Bailiff of the Portage 
(Voloch'skyi Tiuri) should hear 
that a German merchant and 
men of Smolensk have arrived 
at the Portage, he is to send his 
man without delay to the Por- 
tagers (Volochane) so that they 
may transport the German mer- 
chant and the men of Smolensk 
with [their] goods [across the 
Portage]. No one should cause 
them any hindrance, because 
... it may lead to a great deal 
of damage to the men of Smo- 
lensk and to the Germans at 
the hands of the pagans. 

* 6 

Lots are drawn to determine 
who is to cross the Portage first. 

If a Russian merchant [from 
some other place than Smo- 
lensk] should arrive, he is to 
follow afterward. 

X P. V. Golubovskii, Istoriia smolenskoi zemli do nachala XV stoletiia (Kiev, 
1895), pp. 156170; see also L. K. Goetz, Deutsch-Russische Handelsgeschichte 
des Mittelalters (Liibeck, 1922), pp. 439-543. In the Code of 1229, "Latin mer- 
tedly means "non-Orthodox^ "non-Russian" and, most likely, 

chants" undoubtedly 



c. The same regulations ap- 
ply to the Russians in Riga and 
on the coast of Gothland. 


If a Latin merchant arrives 
in the town [Smolensk] from 
the Portage, he is to give to the 
Princess a roll of cloth and to 
the Bailiff of the Portage a pair 
of gloves, so that there will be 
no delay in transporting the 


If any Portager should 
undertake to transport Latin 
goods across the Portage and 
should any part of these goods 
perish, then all the Portagers 
must pay [the damages]. 


The Bishop of Riga, the 
Master of the Godly Nobles, 
and all landholders permit free 
passage along the Dvina from 
its source to its mouth on the 
sea, whether by water or land, 
to all [merchants] Latin or 


If, God forbid, anybody in 
these lands [along the Dvina] 
should lose a boat (uchari) or 
skiff (chelri), whether [he be] 
Russian or Latin, his goods 
should not be seized either in 
the water or on the shore. 

If a German merchant ar- 
rives in the town [Smolensk], 
he is to give to the Princess a 
roll of cloth and to the Bailiff 
of the Portage Gothic gloves 
with fingers. 


If any Portager should load 
German or Smolensk goods on 
his wagons in order to trans- 
port them across the Portage 
and should any part of the 
goods perish, then all the Por- 
tagers must pay [the damages], 


The Bishop of Riga, Fol- 
koun, the Master of the Godly 
Nobles, and all Lords of the 
Riga country permit free pas- 
sage along the Dvina from its 
source to its mouth, by water 
or land, to every Russian mer- 
chant going up or down the 


If, God forbid, anybody suf- 
fers a wreck or loses a boat, 
whether [he be] a Russian or a 
German, he is allowed to bring 
his goods without any harm to 
the shore. 

Appendix 3 ^ Extracts from Documents and 
Other Sources Illustrating the Fortified 
Line of 1571 and Its Successors 


YEAR 1571 (7079), January i, the Sovereign Tsar and Grand Prince 
Ivan Vasilievich of all the Russias commanded his Boiar Prince 
Mikhailo Ivanovich Vorotynskii to assume charge of the patrols 
and outposts and of the entire Sovereign's service on the open 
frontier (polskie sluzhby). 

January 7, in accordance with the command of the Sovereign 
Tsar and Grand Prince, the Boiar Prince Mikhailo Ivanovich 
Vorotynskii passed the word of the Sovereign to the Secretary (Diak) 
Ondrei Klobukov and his associates in the Military Office 
(Rozriad). The Sovereign ordered him [Vorotynskii] to take charge 
of and to reorganize the patrols and outposts and ordered him to 
find former lists of the patrols. Summonses should be sent to 
Putivl, Tula, Riazan, Meshchera, and other frontier towns, and 
to Severa [a region in the Ukraine], calling for the lesser nobility 
("sons of boiars") [there follows an enumeration of other groups], 
patrol guards, and frontier guards who make rounds from Putivl 
[an enumeration of the towns named above follows] toward dif- 
ferent places in the open frontier and who have served during the 
last ten to fifteen years. Men from the nearest towns are to appear 
in Moscow the day following Epiphany, men from Putivl two 
weeks later. [There follow Instructions to the local officials asking 
them to send also veterans crippled in the frontier service and those 
(Russians) who had been in Tatar captivity. Then a statement 
follows that the Instructions calling for men were sent out, and 
that the men arrived in Moscow, some in January, others In 

The Boiar Prince Mikhailo Ivanovich Vorotynskii reviewed the 
lists of the lesser nobility of all towns [an enumeration of other 
categories called to Moscow follows] and reported concerning them 
to the Sovereign Tsar and Grand Prince. 

The Sovereign . . . Ivan Vasilievich ordered Vorotynskii to 

attend to the business of the patrols, outposts, and various frontier 

1 N. A. Popov (ed.), Akty moskovskago gosudarstva (St. Petersburg, 1890), 1, 1-2. 



services, to question [the men who had been summoned and here 
enumerated], and, upon receiving information, to write in detail: 
from what town or place the patrols should come and where they 
should be sent; where the stationary guards should be posted; how 
far and in what direction patrols should be sent from the outposts; 
where the commanders (golovy) should be stationed to watch for 
the hostile invasion; how many men there should be under each 

commander and from what town they should come After the 

questioning was over and the lists of men were ready, the Sovereign 
appointed Prince Mikhailo Tiufiakin and the Secretary Rzhevskii 
to supervise the commanders (dosmotriti golov) on the Crimean 
frontier, and lurii Bulgakov and Boris Khokhlov, those on the 
Nogai frontier. They were personally to determine where the head- 
quarters of the commanders should be established and where 
patrols should be placed 


i. Donets outposts 

First outpost between the Mzha and the Kolomak [rivers] 

[on the portage through which went a trail called the 

Muravskii Shliakh]. . . . 
Second outpost of Obyshkinskaia ... to guard along the 

Donets [River] ... as far as the Shebalinov Ford. 
Third outpost of Bolykleia ... to guard along the Donets 

as far as the Savinskii Ford. . . . 
Fourth outpost to Savinskaia and Iziumskaia ... to guard 

along the Donets ... as far as the Savinskii Ford. . . . 
Fifth outpost of Sviatogorskaia ... to guard along the 


Sixth outpost of Bakhmutovskaia ... to guard along the 

Donets. . . . 
Seventh outpost of Aidarskaia . . . discontinued in 1571. ... 

ii. Putivl outposts 

First outpost between the Psiol and the Vorskla [rivers] on 
the pass (v prokhodekh) [portage between these two rivers 

on the route of a trail called the Bakaev Shliakh] 

Second outpost between the Psiol and the Seim [rivers] 

[portage between these rivers] 

Third outpost at Skala near Sarkel (Belaia Vezha). 
2 Ibid., 1,7-13. 


iii. Additional Putivl outposts 

First, along the Seim, at Mokoshevichi. . . . 
Second, along the Seim, at Rozsokhl. . . . 
Third, on the Seim . . . five versts from Putivl. . . . 
Fourth, at Belye Berega, ten versts from Putivl. . . . 

iv. Outposts from Rylsk 

First, on the Seim, at Pnevitsy ... to guard the ford [on the 

route of a trail called the Svinaia Doroga]. . . . 
Second, on the Koryzha [River] to guard the ford [on the 

route of the Svinaia Doroga]. . . . 

v. Outposts from the frontier towns . . . along the Sosna, Don, 
Mecha., and other rivers 

First outpost on the Sosna, at the mouth of the Livna 

[River] [route of the Muravskii Shliakh]. . . . 
Second outpost on the Sosna, near the mouth of the Cher- 

nava [River] [route of a trail called the Kalmiusskaia 

Sakma]. . . . 

Third outpost at the mouth of the Vorgla. . . . 
Fourth outpost at the Talitskii Ford. . . . 
Fifth outpost on the Don at the Galich Mountains. . . . 
Sixth outpost at Krivoi Bor ... to guard the Don . . . and to 

the left as far as the Voronezh [River] [portage between 

the Don and the Voronezh?]. . . . 

Seventh outpost on the Don at the mouth of the Skverna. . . . 
Eighth outpost on the upper Skverna [River] [near the 

portage between the Skverna and the Stanovaia Riasa]. . . . 
Ninth outpost above Kobelsha and lagodna [near the 

portage between the Skverna and the Riasa]. . . . 
Tenth outpost at the sources of the Riasa [at the portage 

between the Skverna and the Riasa]. . . . 
Eleventh outpost on the Mecha, at the Turmyshskii Ford. . . . 
Twelfth outpost on the Mecha, between the Zelenkov and 

Sementsov Fords. . . . 
Thirteenth outpost on the Viazovna [River] . , . on the 

Dryginskaia Doroga (Road). . . . 
Fourteenth outpost on the Viazovna on the Turmyshevskaia 

Doroga. . . . 


vi. [Outposts] from Epifan 

First outpost at the sources o the Nepriadva and Sukromna 
[rivers] [at the portage between the Nepriadva, Media 
(tributary of the Don) and the Upa (tributary of the 

Oka)]. . . . 

vii. Outposts from Dedilov 

First outpost on the Uperta [River] at the Kamennyi Ford. ... 

Second outpost at Lake Volovo [right on the portage be- 
tween tributaries of the Oka and the Don] 

Third outpost at the sources of the Upa and Turdeeva Media 
[on the portage between tributaries of the Oka and the 

Fourth outpost at Vladychnia Kria near the Muravskii 
Shliakh. . . . 

Fifth outpost at Kuzemkina Dubrova ... to guard to the 
left as far as the Muravskii Shliakh, to the right as far as 

viii. Outposts from Novosil 

First outpost at the sources of the River Liubosha. . . . 

Second outpost at Kust. . . . 

Third outpost on the River Liubosha at the mouth of the 
Korytna. . . . 

Fourth outpost on the Sosna [River] 

Fifth outpost on the Sosna. . . . 

Sixth outpost between the Perestriazha and lakovlevskii for- 
ests [near the portage between the tributaries of the Sosna 
and the Zusha rivers]. . . . 

Seventh outpost beyond the Zusha 

Eighth outpost at Pshevskii Hill. . . . 

Ninth outpost at Zarachunskii Hill 

Tenth outpost at Vezhki 

Eleventh outpost near the mouth of the river Kakolna. . . 

ix. Outposts from Mtsensk 

First outpost at the mouth of the Kolpna [River], on the 
Sosna. . . . 

Second outpost on the Sosna 

Third outpost on the Neruch [River] 

Fourth outpost on the Neruch 


x. Outposts from Orel and Karachev 

First outpost on the Seim, opposite Gorodenskoe Gorod- 

ishcfae. . . . 
Second outpost . . . between the road to Karachev and the 

Mestilov Gates and the road used by Bakai. 

Third outpost on the river Molodova . . . where all the 

roads from the Seim and Rylsk come together. . . . 
Fourth outpost on the upper Ochka [River]. . . . 
Fifth outpost on the Oka near the . . . ford, fifteen versts 

from Orel. . . . 

Sixth outpost above Oleshan. . . . 
Seventh outpost beyond the Oka. . . . 
Eighth outpost beyond the Oka. . . . 

xi. Outposts from Meshchera 

First outpost on the Kargonaeva [River], and this river flows 

into the Barysh River, and the Barysh River flows into the 

Sura [River]. . . . 
Second outpost on the river Shoksha between the Sura and 

Mokshanskii Forest. . . . 

Third outpost on the upper part of the river Lomova. . . . 
Fourth outpost above the Vad. . . . 

xii. Outposts from Shatsk 

First outpost at the Lipovetskii Forest. . . . 
Second outpost on the Chelnava [River] at the mouth of the 
Lamka [River]. . . . 

xiii. Outposts from Riassk (now Riazhsk) 

First outpost ... on the Voronezh [River]. . . 

Second outpost above the Lomova near the Nogaiskaia 

Doroga. . . . 
Third outpost on the Riasa [River]. . . . 



i. 1637. Circular of Instructions of the Tsar to Perm Velikaia 

. . . Last year, in 1636 (7144), for protection against the invaders 
we ordered a town (gorod) to be built on the open frontier (na pole} 
. . . and according to our order the town of Kozlov was built on the 
open frontier on the [river] Lesnoi Voronezh. . . . From Kozlov 
toward Shatsk, between the rivers Polnyi Voronezh and Chelnova 
(Chelnava), an earthen rampart twelve versts long was constructed. 
Three earthen forts with towers . . . were erected on this rampart. 
At Kasimov Ford an earthen fort and a rampart 1400 feet (200 
sazhen) long were constructed. In previous years the Crimean and 
Nogai [Tatars] used to come by the Kalmiusskaia and Iziumskaia 

Sakmy (Roads) and by the Muravskii Shliakh In accordance 

with our order, an ostrog with a permanent garrison was built be- 
tween Livny and Elets on the river [Bystraia] Sosna, at the mouth 
of the river Chemava; also an ostrog was built on the same Sosna, 
below Elets, at Talitskii Ford. . . . 

In 1636 (7144) ... on the Tatar Road (Nogaiskaia Doroga) a town 
was built in place of the former Orlovsk Fort (gorodishche). . . . On 
the River Tsna, at the mouth of the River Lipovitsa, the town of 
Tanbov (now Tambov) was built. . . . From Tanbov toward Kozlov 
the earthen rampart was reinforced by a row of poles. Beyond 
Shatsk toward the frontier two towns Lomov Verkhnii and Lomov 
Nizhnii were erected on the river Lomova. . . . 

[According to the recommendations of Fedor Sukhotin and a 
clerk (pod'iachei), Evsei lur'ev, which were accepted by the govern- 
ment] for protection against invasion by enemies, the following 
towns with permanent garrisons, ostrogs, and fortifications are to 
be constructed: A town is to be built on the river [Tikhaia] Sosna, 

on the Kalmiusskaia Sakma near the Ternovskii Forest Another 

town is to be built also on the Kalmiusskaia Sakma along the upper 
[Tikhaia] Sosna, at the mouth of the Userd River in place of Nizh- 
nee Fort; above the mouth of the Userd from the sources of the 
river [Tikhaia] Sosna toward the sources of the river Volui, where 
there is an ostrog, a rampart fifteen versts long must be constructed. 
At each end of the rampart there should be a small ostrog. Also on 

a Akty, sobrannye u bibliotckakh i arkhivakh rossiiskoi imperil arkheografiche- 
skoiu ekspeditsieiu imperatorskoi akademii nauk (4 vols., St. Petersburg, 1836), 
III, 410-411, 449-450, IV, 30. 


the Kalmlusskaia Sakma, on the river Olshanka, at the mouth of 
the small river Trostenka, near the Ternovskii Forest an ostrog 
with a permanent garrison is to be established. On the river Oskol 
near the Zhestovy Mountains there is to be a small ostrog with a 
permanent garrison. On five fords along the river [Tikhaia] Sosna 
stakes and poles o oak should be imbedded in water, and also along 
the [Tikhaia] Sosna in three places in the woods, on the river 
Oskol, and on the Fomichkin River bend, trees should be felled 
and an abatis made. 

On the Iziumskaia Sakma near lablonov Forest an ostrog with 
a permanent garrison should be established. An earthen rampart 
should be built from the sources of the Kholka across the steppe to 
the small river Korocha. At both ends of the rampart near the 
ostrog on the Korocha and on the small Kholka small ostrogs are 
to be built. 

A town with a permanent garrison is to be built on the Muravskii 
Shliakh by the Vorskla at the Karpov outpost. From this town a 
wall with forts should be built toward Belgorod as far as the small 

ii. 164 J. The Tsar's message to Prince Peter Pozharskii, the military 

commander (uoevo da) of Odoev 

... As soon as you receive this message, order . . . the construction 
of a barrier 140 feet in depth made of felled trees, instead of pits, 
from the River Vyrka to the River Sosenna. From the River Sosenna 
to the Peremyzhskaia and Kozelskaia abatis . . . erect such earthen 
fortifications as you may find necessary. Along the abatis extending 
from the large Borovensk ostrog to the small Borovensk ostrog there 
used to be a moat, and between the abatis and the moat stood a 

double row of poles Order the abatis to be reinforced, clear the 

moat, and strengthen the poles. 

iii. 1647. Tsar's message 

. . .We ordered a town (gorod) with a permanent garrison to be 
built on the river Oskol, at the mouth of the Bel Kolodez, for pro- 
tection against invasion by the Tatars. From this town across the 
Kalmiusskaia Sakma (Road) an earthen rampart, with permanent 
earthen fortifications along the rampart, should be constructed. 



i. Frontier outposts (according to Beliaev*) 

From the front-line towns, at a distance of four or five days' 
journey, sometimes nearer, outposts were established in the steppe, 
and these in turn were placed at distances from each other of one 
or, rarely, two days' journey. These outposts were in constant com- 
munication with each other and composed a series of continuous 
lines athwart all the trails across the steppe used by the Tatars to 
invade Russia. They [the outposts] stretched in groups from the 
sources of the Sura to the Seim, and then from the Seim they turned 
toward the Vorskla and the Donets. The first, most eastern group 
lay in a convex line from the Barysh, a tributary of the Sura, to the 
Lomov, a tributary of the Tsna; the second group, from the Tsna 
to the Riasa, a tributary of the Voronezh; the third group, from the 
Riasa, along the Bystraia Sosna and its tributaries, to the sources 
of the Oka; the fourth, along the tributaries of the Seim; the fifth, 
from the Seim to the Sula, the Psiol, and the Vorskla; the sixth, 
along the tributaries of the Vorskla and the Donets to the mouth of 
the Aidar. Before 1571 there were, altogether, seventy-three out- 
posts and they were officially divided into twelve groups [P. 13.] 

In the same year [1640], May 11 [the military commander 
(voevoda)\ Tolstoi arrived at Khotmyshskoe Gorodishche. He built 
there an ostrog of oak, 2345 feet (335 sazhen) in circumference, with 
seven towers, three with gates and four without gates. He con- 
structed roofs over the towers, as well as shutes for throwing missiles, 
and embrasures for shooting. On the Muscovite side beyond the 
ostrog he dug a moat 14 feet (2 sazhen) deep. Toward the river 
Vorskla he built an underground passage 545 feet (75 sazhen) long 
and 2, i feet (3 sazhen) wide. He armed the newly built ostrog with 
nine cannon, to which in 1641 were added six more sent from 
Moscow. ... [P. 49.] 

From the town of Userd up the Sosna River it is fifteen versts to 
the ostrog of Rozdornyi. The circumference of the latter is 420 feet 
(60 sazhen). Around the ostrog there is a moat 14 feet (2 sazhen) 
wide Beyond the moat there is a double row of poles with cross- 
pieces There are two copper cannon [P. 50.] 

* I. Beliaev, "O storozhevoi, stanichnoi, i polevoi sluzhbe na pol'skoi Ukraine 
moskovskago gosudarstva do tsarla Alekseia Mikhailovichar Chteniia . . . pri 
moskovskom univenitete, No. 4 (1846), pp. 5-86. 


From the town of Userd beyond the River Userd from the ... 
Ilovskii Forest there are earthen ramparts and a moat. Beyond the 
moat there are three rows of poles with crosspieces. On the earthen 
ramparts there are five earthen towers . . . and the sixth tower is 

made of oak with eight walls and stands on the hill This tower 

is 42 feet (6 sazheri) high to the top. Its diameter is 38 1/2 feet (5 1/2 
sazheri). . . . Through this tower pass the gates. Altogether, in 1641 
and 1642 this rampart was made 9583 feet (1369 sazheri) long, not 
counting space for towers 

. . . Across the ford there is a palisade of oak in the water . . . and 
on both banks holes conceal sharpened poles [P. 52.] 

ii. Description of the towns of the Belgorod line of 1668 (after 
Bagalei 5 ) 

Belgorod. One wooden fortress (gorod) is built like a stockade 
with a parapet and has ten towers. . . . The circumference of the 
fortress is 4552 feet (650 1/4 sazheri). Inside it there are two wells 
with good water. Leading from this fortress and ostrog there is 
another fortification toward the river Donets: two walls con- 
structed of earth and crowned with a palisade of oak. Two gates 
lead through these walls. Along the river Donets there is a third 
wall, a stockade without a parapet. At the bridge across the river 
Donets there is a tower with a gate. The circumference, including 
the three walls, gates, and towers, is 9499 feet (1357 sazheri). . . . 

[P- 54-] 

On the Belgorod line, between Belgorod and Bolkhovets [on 
one side], and along the Severnyi Donets in the direction of Nezhe- 
golsk on another side, according to the inspection and description 
by a Belgorodian, Peter Nechaev, made in the current year, the 
earthen rampart and the palisade of oak in many places are in a 
dilapidated condition. The timbers are rotten . . . and in some 
places the rampart has collapsed. ... In the summer they cut the 
grass near the rampart and burn it. From the Belgorod fortress 
toward Akhtyrsk, and on the other side of Belgorod toward Koro- 
toiak and Uryv, the earthen rampart, the palisade of oak, the abatis, 
and the turrets made of logs are in good condition. [Pp. 56-57.] 

5 D, L Bagalei, Materialy dlia istorii kolonizatsii i bytastepnoi okrainy moskov- 
skogo gosudarstva v XVI-XVIII stoletii (Kharkov, 1886), pp. 54, 56. 

Appendix 4 & Seventeenth-Century 
Descriptions of Portages and Ostrogs, and 
River and Land Transportation In Siberia 


CONCERNING the location of each town and ostrog, specifying the 
river above which the listed town or ostrog is situated and stating 
the distance between the towns or ostrogs, over both the winter and 
summer land routes, by horses and by sleighs (narty) to which dogs 
are harnessed, as well as the distance by the river routes, in large 
boats (doshchaniki) and in light craft (strugi) .The list has been com- 
piled from the information given by the serving men of Tobolsk and 
of other Siberian towns. [The list also includes information pertain- 
ing to the stage service:] what people do the driving, how far, and 
over which roads they drive. All this [information] is written down 
in this list, each item separately. 

The town of Verkhoturie stands above the river Tiira. Traveling 
in large boats from Verkhoturie to the ostrog of Turinsk by the 
water route, it takes three days' sailing down the Hira to reach the 
mouth of the Tagil River. From the mouth of the Tagil River to 
the ostrog of Turinsk one travels two and one-half days (pol-j dni}. 
In lighter craft the journey from Verkhoturie to the ostrog of 
Turinsk may be made in four days. The return journey from the 
ostrog of Tiirinsk to Verkhoturie in large boats upstream takes nine 
days; in lighter craft, five days. On horses, via the summer and 
winter land routes, the journey to the ostrog of Turinsk takes four 
days, and traveling posthaste it may be made in three. 

The ostrozhek (small blockhouse) of Tagil is in the County (Uezd) 
of Verkhoturie above the Tagil River. Traveling on horses, over 
the winter and summer land routes, the journey [from Verkho- 
turie] to the ostrozhek of Tagil takes one day; in large boats over 
the water route down the Tiira, it takes three days to reach the 
Tagil River and three more days up the Tagil to reach the ostrozhek. 

1 A. Titov, Sibii* v XVII veke. Sbornik starinnykh russkikh statei o Sibiri i 
prilezhashchzkh k nei zemliakh (Moscow, 1890), pp. 9-22. Oleg Maslenikov 
assisted in the translation of this document . 



The ostrozhek of Nev'ia is in the County of Verkhoturie above 
the Nev'ia River. Traveling on horses, over the winter and summer 
land routes, the journey from Verkhoturie to the ostrozhek of 
Nev'ia takes three days. No water route is used from Verkhoturie 
to Nev'ia. 

The journey from Verkhoturie to Pelym over the winter and 
summer land route takes five days. No one goes in boats by water 
from Verkhoturie to Pelym. 

Messengers sent on urgent government business from the Sibe- 
rian towns Tobolsk, Tiumen, or the ostrog of Turinsk to the 
Sovereign at Moscow, either in the fall or before the road is closed 
(po poslednemu puti), go by the following route. From Verkhoturie 
they travel by way of the Chiusovaia (now Chusovaia) [River] and 
the ostrogs of the Stroganovs. One man who hails from Solikamsk, 
traveling lightly, is sent forth from Verkhoturie to hire carts, vessels, 
and oarsmen. The boats and oarsmen obtained in Solikamsk are 
brought along the Kama to the mouth of the Chiusovaia River, 
since there is no stage station (iam) along the Chiusovaia and the 
Stroganovs will not furnish carts, boats, or oarsmen. Going from 
Verkhoturie to the Chiusovaia, people with luggage travel three 
days by the land route to reach the end of the portage; from the end 
of the portage it takes three days' sailing down the Chiusovaia to 
reach the Kama. Traveling in carts and boats, the oarsmen being 
obtainable with the boats in Solikamsk, the journey from the mouth 
of the Chusovaia [sic] River to Laishev is made in eight days; from 
Laishev to Kazan is another thirty versts* journey overland. With 
a load, the journey from Verkhoturie to Solikamsk over the sum- 
mer land route consumes from eight to ten days or a fortnight, or 
even longer; traveling light and fast, the journey may be made in 
five or six days. Traveling over the winter road, the distance may 
be covered in five or six days, and traveling thus posthaste, four 
days. The journey down the Kama from Solikamsk [to the mouth 
of the Kama] can, in light craft, be made in ten days, and from 
[the mouth of] the Kama sailing up the Volga it takes another five 
days to reach Kazan. Traveling posthaste on horses over the winter 
route, the journey from Verkhoturie to Moscow via Ustiug Velikii 
takes three weeks. The messengers who come from Kazan do not 
ride to Verkhoturie by way of the ostrogs of the Stroganovs or the 
Chiusovaia portage, since, there being no stage station established 
at the Chiusovaia, they have no place to hire carts. Volunteer (okhot- 
niki) drivers drive from Verkhoturie along four roads: to Soli- 


karnsk, to the Chiusovaia River, to the ostrog of Turinsk, and to 

The ostrog o Turinsk stands above the Tura River. From the 
ostrog of Tiirinsk to Tiumen, it takes two and one-half days' travel- 
ing in large boats (doshchaniki and lodii) down the Tura to reach 
the mouth of the Nitsa River; from the mouth of the Nitsa to 
Tiumen, still traveling along the Tura, there is another one and 
one-half days' journey. In light craft the journey from the ostrog 
of Turinsk to Tiumen may be made in two days. The return journey 
from Tiumen to the ostrog of Tiirinsk along the Tiira River up- 
stream may be negotiated in nine days in the heavier vessels, and 
in lighter craft, in six. Traveling on horses over the winter and 
summer land routes, the journey from the ostrog of Turinsk to 
Tiumen may be made in three days. Traveling in the direction of 
Pelym, it takes three days over the summer land routes with horses 
to reach the village of Tabarinsk of the County of Pelym. From 
the village of Tabarinsk it takes five more days of driving to Pelym. 
[In all,] it takes eight days of driving to reach Pelym [from the 
ostrog of Tarinsk]. The journey from the village of Tabarinsk to 
Pelym may be made over the water route up the Tavda River; 
sailing in large boats, this journey may be completed in seven days, 
and in small boats, in four days. No water route is used between 
the ostrog of Turinsk and the village of Tabarinsk. Volunteer stage 
drivers drive from the ostrog of Hirinsk to the village of Tabarinsk. 
The tribute-paying Voguls of Pelym drive stages from the village 
of Tabarinsk to Pelym for all who are sent on state business. 

The town of Pelym stands above the Tavda River. The length 
of time required to reach Verkhoturie and the ostrozhek [sic] of 
Turinsk [therefrom] over the winter and the summer land routes 
by horses, and over the water routes, has already been described 
above. The tribute-paying Voguls of Pelym engage in transporta- 
tion service from yurt to yurt along the three routes from Pelym: 
to Verkhoturie, to the ostrog of Turinsk, and to Tiumen. 

The Chiubarovo Village (slob o da) is situated above the Nitsa 
River in the County of Turinsk. It has a small ostrog. From the 
ostrog of Turinsk, traveling by horses over the winter and summer 
land routes, it takes one day to reach the village. Owing to the 
distance, the water route from the ostrog of Turinsk to Chiubarovo 
is not used as a means of communication. 

The town of Tiumen stands above the Tura River. Traveling 
along the summer route on horses, it takes seven days to reach 


Tobolsk from Tiumen; traveling over the winter route, the same 

journey may be made in five days; sailing over the water route In 

large boats down the Tura River, it takes three days to reach the 

Tobol River; then four [more] days along the Tobol to reach the 

Irtysh; thence it is only one more verst along the Irtysh to Tobolsk. 

Thus, in all it takes a week to reach Tobolsk from Tiumen in large 

boats. In lighter craft the journey may be made in four days. The 

return voyage from Tobolsk to Tiumen takes, in larger boats, ten 

days, and in lighter craft, six. From Tiumen to Pelym, over the 

water route, down the Tura to the mouth of the Tobol . . . Tiumen 

volunteer coachmen drive stages from Tiumen along three^ roads: 

to Tobolsk, to Pelym, and to the ostrog of Turinsk. From Tiumen, 

messengers are sent to Ufa with news on government business. It is a 

three weeks' journey by horses from Tiumen to Ufa. [The travelers] 

take carts from one yurt to another from the dependent (zakhre- 

betnye) and tribute-paying Tatars. In winter the journey to Ufa 

may be made on skis in five weeks. 

The town of Tobolsk stands above the Irtysh River. The town of 
Tara may be reached from Tobolsk on horses by the winter route 
in two weeks' time, and traveling posthaste, in ten days. The jour- 
ney may be made in three weeks along the summer route by poor 
roads, unless one goes through the tribute-paying rural districts 
(volosts). The journey from Tobolsk to Tara, traveling in large boats 
along the water route up the Irtysh River, the way the bread sup- 
plies are sent with serving men, takes three days to reach the mouth 
of the Vagai River; from the mouth of the Vagai, twelve more days 
to the mouth of the Ishim; and from the mouth of the Ishim to the 
town of Tara along the Irtysh, two weeks more. In all, it takes four 
weeks and a day to reach Tara from Tobolsk via the water route. 
Messengers on government affairs, on light craft to Tara . . . take 
ten days, and posthaste, eight. 

Traveling in large boats up the Irtysh, the way serving men of 
Tobolsk and of other Siberian towns of the Tobolsk Administra- 
tive Region (Rozriad) go for salt, takes four weeks and three days to 
reach the lamysh Salt Lake from Tara. The return trip down the 
Irtysh takes two weeks, and from Tara to Tobolsk, ten days. 

To insure the protection of the Sovereign's tribute-paying rural 
districts, small blockhouses are established throughout the counties 
of Tobolsk and Tara. 

The small blockhouse of Vagai stands above the Vagai River. 
The distance thence to Tobolsk along the winter and summer land 


routes is a single day's travel by horses; three days' travel in large 
boats by the water route up the Irtysh; and two days* travel in 
lighter craft [along the same route]. 

The small blockhouse of Kaurdat stands above a lake. The dis- 
tance to it from Tobolsk over the winter route is four days' travel 
by horses, while by the summer land route it is six days' travel; 
and by the water route up the Irtysh, ten days' travel in large boats, 
and in light craft, posthaste, three days. 

The small blockhouse of Tebendin stands above the Irtysh River. 
The distance to it from Tobolsk over the winter and summer land 
routes is five days' travel by horses; by water it is one week's travel 
in large boats up the Irtysh, and three days' travel in lighter craft. 

The small blockhouse of Ishim Ustie stands above a lake. The 
distance to it from Tobolosk by the winter route is six days' journey 
on horses, and by the summer route, ten; the distance over the water 
route is a fortnight's journey up the Irtysh in large boats, and five 
days' fast travel in lighter craft. 

The small blockhouse of Tarkhansk stands above the Tobol 
River. The distance to it from Tobolsk is four days' travel by 
horses over the winter route, and over the summer land route, five 
days; by the water route up the Tobol River it is a seven-day jour- 
ney in large boats and a five-day voyage in lighter craft. 

And when the serving men are sent from Tobolsk to these small 
blockhouses on government business or at news of the approach of 
[hostile] military forces, the dependent and tribute-paying Tatars 
of Tobolsk transport them. 

Traveling in large boats from Tobolsk to Berezov, via the water 
route, when serving men are sent from Tobolsk with the govern- 
ment grain, one sails for nine days down the Irtysh to its confluence 
with the Ob', down the Ob' for ten more days, then by way of a 
branch (protok) of the Ob' it takes another half day {1^ dnishche) to 
reach the River Sob' [sic], and one-half day more sailing down the 
Sob' [sic] [to Berezov]. The distance from Tobolsk to Berezov via 
the winter route is a week's journey by horses to the mouth of the 
Irtysh, with dependent and tribute-paying Tatars driving stages 
from village to village. 

The Sovereign's tribute-paying Ostiaks of Surgut County drive 
sleighs with dogs from the mouth of the Irtysh as far as the Sotnikov 
Yurts in four days. The Ostiaks of Prince Dmitrii Alachev drive 
from the Sotnikov Yurts to Berezov in five days. When they send 
the serving men on government business from Tobolsk to Surgut by 


the winter route, the dependent Tatars o Tobolsk drive stages for 
them from Aremzinsk Village to Tobolsk. The journey takes one 
day. The tribute-paying Ostiaks of Tobolsk cover the distance from 
Aremzinsk Village to the mouth of the Irtysh in six days. From 
the mouth of the Irtysh the tribute-paying Ostiaks of Surgut County 
drive sleighs with dogs. In all, the journey from Tobolsk to Surgut 
by horses and sleighs with dogs takes two weeks. The journey over 
the water route, used for sending serving men with the government 
grain supplies down the Irtysh in large boats, takes nine days to 
the mouth of the Irtysh, and from the mouth of the Irtysh up the 
river Irtysh [sic] to Surgut, ten days more. In all, the journey from 
Tobolsk to Surgut via the water route consumes two weeks and five 
days, while in lighter craft, posthaste, it may be made in two weeks. 

The distance from Tobolsk to Babasan Village, en route to the 
town of Pelym, over the winter route is two days' travel by horses, 
the dependent Tatars of Tobolsk doing the driving. From Babasan 
Village tribute-paying Ostiaks of Tobolsk drive to Pelym County 
in four days. Tribute-paying Voguls of Pelym County drive from 
Pelym County [boundary] to Pelym in five days. In all, the distance 
from Tobolsk to Pelym via the winter route is eleven days' travel 
by horses, and traveling posthaste it takes nine days. By the water 
route up the Tobol and Tavda rivers it is a three weeks* journey. 
It takes nine days* travel by horses to reach Tabarinsk Village in 
Pelym County, driving over the summer land route. No one goes 
by the land route by horses from Tabarinsk Village to Pelym. 

The dependent Tatars of Tobolsk drive the stage from Tobolsk 
for the Sovereign's military commanders (voevodas), officers, and 
others who travel from Moscow to Siberian towns and ostrogs. They 
drive along the four roads: to Tiumen, to Berezov, to Tara and to 
Pelym. The serving Tatars of Tobolsk aid them in their driving, 
since their children, brothers, and nephews also live in dependence 
[upon the government]. 

The town of Tara stands above the Agirka River. From Tara 
news messengers are dispatched to the town of Tomsk. Going from 
Tara to Tomsk by horses over the summer land route, one travels 
two weeks through Tara County to Terenin Village. From Terenin 
Village to the town of Tomsk also takes two weeks. Messengers with 
news are also sent from Tara to the ostrog of Naryrn. The distance 
from Tara to Narym County over the summer land route is three 
weeks' travel by horses through the black forests. The Tara tribute- 
paying Tatars do the driving to the town of Tomsk and to the ostrog 


of Narym. There Is neither a winter route nor a water route from 
Tara to the town of Tomsk and to the ostrog of Narym. There are 
no other stage routes from the town of Tara. 

The town of Berezov stands above the Vagulka River. Govern- 
ment serving men are sent on state business to Obdor. Traveling 
in light craft from Berezov to Obdor over the water route down 
the Ob', the journey may be made in four days; nine days are con- 
sumed in travel over the winter route by sleighs with dogs, the 
Sovereign's tribute-paying Ostiaks doing the driving. 

The winter quarters (zimot/e) of Obdor stands above the Pului 
River. The distance between the winter quarters of Obdor and 
the town of Mangazeia over the water route is three week's travel 
in large sailboats (kochi) under favorable wind. The return trip 
takes the same length of time. There is no travel to Mangazeia in 

From the towns of Berezov and Tomsk, and from the ostrogs of 
Eniseisk and Krasnoiarsk, furs gathered as the Sovereign's tribute 
(iasak) are sent to Moscow across the Ural Mountains (Kamen'). 
Going from Berezov to Russia, it takes four days of navigating up 
the Ob* [sic] in light boats to reach the mountains; thence overland 
over the portages (voloki), two weeks more; from the portages down 
the Usa River it takes ten days to reach the Pechora River; down 
the Pechora to the Izhma River, three days; up the Izhma to Izhma 
Village of Pustoozersk County, two days. Itinerants (guliashchie 
liudi) are hired as sailors from Berezov to Izhma Village, and they 
are remunerated at Berezov with funds out of the Sovereign's 

The patrimonial estate (votchina) of Prince Dmitrii Alachev is 
also located in Berezov County above the Ob' River. 

Mention of distances from there to Berezov and Tobolsk via the 
winter and the water routes and of the other places, to which the 
Ostiaks of Prince Dmitrii Alachev carry communications, has been 
made above. 

The town of Mangazeia stands above the Taz River. Driving 
over the winter route, it takes three weeks to reach Tumkhansk 
from Mangazeia en route to the Eniseisk ostrog, though traveling 
posthaste the trip may be made in one week. It takes one [more] 
week to reach the Inbatsk winter quarters from Turukhansk; and 
from the Inbatsk winter quarters it is six days' travel to the Pod- 
kamennaia Tunguska River. Various serving men from Mangazeia 
when sent on government business to the Podkamennaia Tunguska 


River are driven by Russian coachmen on sleighs with dogs. The 
fare for transportation is collected from the merchants and entre- 
preneurs (promyshlennye liudi). 

The Sovereign's tribute-paying Ostiaks make the journey from 
the Podkamennaia Tunguska River to the Eniseisk ostrog by sleighs 
with dogs in three weeks. If the water route is used from Mangazeia 
to the Eniseisk ostrog, it takes two days of sailing up the Taz River 
in large craft to reach the River Volochaika; then six days upstream 
to the portage. The portage is half a verst long. At the portage they 
do not carry large boats; but they drag light craft (kaiuki and 
strugi) across to another river also called the Volochaika. It takes 
two days to reach the Turukhan River. It takes six more days sail- 
ing down that river to reach the Turukhansk winter quarters. 
From Turukhansk they sail up the Enisei to the Zakamennoe-trib- 
ute winter quarters, a journey of three weeks. From Zakamennoe 
to the Eniseisk ostrog it takes two more weeks of sailing up the 
Enisei. In all, it takes eight weeks by water to reach the Eniseisk 
ostrog from Mangazeia. 

How they send the serving men from Mangazeia to the great 
Lena River below the Turukhan [River] to collect the Sovereign's 
tribute [is listed] below. . . . 

(OSTROGS) IN 1668 2 

FROM Tobolsk down the Irtysh, passing Dem'iansk, one travels to 
the Samarovsk stage station (tarn), then to the mouth of the Irtysh 
River-a half-day's journey. From the mouth of the Irtysh up the 
Ob' River it is about nine days' journey to Surgut; from Surgut, 
using the same river, they travel three or four weeks to Narym; 
from Narym there is a day's journey to the mouth of the Kef; and 
up the Kef River to the ostrog of Ketsk they travel eight or nine 
days. From the ostrog of Ketsk to the Makovsk winter quarters 
(zimov'e) along the same Kef they travel six or seven weeks, and 
from the Makovsk winter quarters to the ostrog of Eniseisk across 
the portage there is a land journey lasting two days. 

From the ostrog of Eniseisk up the Enisei River it is two day's 
journey to the mouth of the Tunguska River. Along the Tunguska 
River upstream, there is a journey twelve weeks long to the ostrog 
of Nizhnii Bratsk. Then [one travels] along the river [upstream] 
and over the rapids; above the mouth of the Him [the upper part 
of the Tunguska] is called the Angara. From the ostrog of Nishnii 

a Titov, op. cit., pp. 30-36. 


Bratsk [at] the mouth of the Oka River up the Angara River it is 
two weeks' travel to the ostrog of Balagansk. And from the Bala- 
gansk ostrog to the ostrog of Irkutsk they travel along the same 
river Angara about two weeks. And from the ostrog of Irkutsk 
up the Angara River they reach Lake Baikal in one week. There 
is a town on this Angara River. They cross Lake Baikal by sail to 
[the mouth of the] Selenga River in about three days, and go up 
the Selenga to the new ostrog of Selenginsk. From Lake Baikal to 
the mouth of the Khilka is a journey of thirteen days, and up the 
Khiika from its mouth to the ostrog of Irgensk is a journey of four- 
teen days. And from the Irgensk ostrog to the Ingoda River by 
lakes and portages is a day's journey. 

And from the portage down the Ingoda and Shilka rivers they 
go by boats (doplyvaiut) to the ostrog of Nerchinsk at the mouth of 
the Nercha River in three days. In this ostrog at the present time 
Larion Tolbuzin, a lesser noble ("boiar son") of Tobolsk, lives with 
serving men. From the ostrog of Nerchinsk to the mouth, of the 
Arkhunia (now Argun') three days of river travel are required. In 
this place the rivers Shilka and Arkhunia come together, and from 
this place begins a river called the Amur. The Arkhunia River 
flows from the great Lake Salar, a lake where there is an abundance 
of fish. Near this lake the Chinese savages, the men of Targachin, 
wander, and they live on fish. Following the Amur River there is a 
one-day journey to the small Chinese town of Lapkaev, but the 
town is deserted by the Chinese people, who fear the Russians. 

From the ostrog of Eniseisk there is a journey of six weeks. . . . 
From the ostrog of Ilimsk there is a portage to the river Muka at 
a distance which may be covered in two days. Here stands a chapel. 
This chapel was built in fulfillment of the vows of the Russian 
merchants. From the chapel down the Kuta and Lena rivers, pass- 
ing the mouths of the Kirenga, the Chiuchiui, the Vitim, and the 
Olekma rivers, there is a journey of two weeks on a large boat to 
the ostrog of lakutsk. From the ostrog of lakutsk down the Lena 
River one reaches the sea in three weeks. And between the Lena 
and Kirenga rivers there are a monastery and a church, and be- 
tween the monastery and the church is a distance of three versts. 

From the ostrog of lakutsk to the ford across the Aldan River is 
a journey of one week by land. From [this] ford one travels four 
weeks to the winter quarters of Verkhoiansk, which is situated on 
the lana River. From the Verkhoiansk winter quarters to the Za- 
shiversk winter quarters one travels three weeks, and the latter 


stands above the river Indigirka. It takes about four weeks to travel 
from the Zashiversk winter quarters to the Alazeevo winter quar- 
ters, and the latter are above the Alazeia River. From the Alazeevo 
winter quarters one travels to the Serednee winter quarters on the 
Kolyma River in one week, and at the sources of this river there 
is a winter quarters called Verkhnee. One gets to this winter quar- 
ters from Serednee, using sleighs, in three weeks. At the mouth of 
the same river [Kolyma] there is also a winter quarters, called 
Nizhnee, and to this from the Serednee winter quarters it is a jour- 
ney of about five weeks. In all these winter quarters there live the 
serving men from the lakutsk ostrog to gather the Sovereign's fur 
tribute (iasak). These rivers, on which are the winter quarters, are 
visited by Russian merchants coming to trade by sea on large craft 
(kochi), and they reach the sea from lakutsk by going down the Lena. 

From the Lena River up the Olekma, passing the mouth of the 
Niukria, to the mouth of the Tugir, one travels on a large boat 
without load about five weeks; with a load, it takes all summer. 
Along the Tugir River is a ten days' journey to the above-mentioned 
Daurian town of Lapkaev. The portage here goes through swamps 
and lakes and rivers, and is very difficult because one has to go on 
foot through these rivers, lakes, and swamps. 

From this little town of Lapkaev one travels a week down the 
Amur River, passing the mouth of the Kamar River, to the mouth 
of the Zeia River. From the mouth of the Zeia down the Amur 
River to the mouth of the river Shingal [Sungari?] is also a journey 
of one week. At the mouth of the river Shingal there is a forest, 
and in this forest there is a Chinese outpost. China extends from 
the Shingal beyond the Amur River all the way to the sea. The 
Naul flows into the Shingal, the river Korga flows into the Naul, 
and on the Korga there is a Chinese town of Mungut. From the 
Shingal to this town the journey takes two weeks. In this town there 
are stationed twenty or thirty or forty Chinese soldiers for protec- 
tion against Russian serving men. From this town there is a portage 
to the Chinese Kingdom, and these people [the garrison] ride on 
horses across this portage in ten days if posthaste, or in a month if 
they travel with supplies. 

From the mouth of the Shingal River down the Amur River there 
is a journey of four days to the mouth of the Ushura. From the 
Ushura [Ussuri?] down the Amur there is a journey of one week to 
the mouth of the Khamun. Along all these rivers are settlements 
of the Daurian people, and in many places they have built small 


towns. They raise summer crops of various kinds of grain, and ap- 
ples, pears, watermelons and other melons, and cucumbers. You 
can grow every kind of Russian vegetable along the River Amur. 
From the mouth of the Khamun down the Amur to the seacoast 
and to the land of the Giliaks is a journey of two weeks. The 
Giliaks live near the sea, and do not raise crops but live on fish. 
You cannot travel to the Chinese Kingdom by this sea on account 
of the ice, but there is a passage to the Nipponese Kingdom (Japan). 
There are gold and silver and precious stones in the Nipponese 
Kingdom, and silk is also produced. 

From the ostrog of Eniseisk to the ostrog of Krasnoiarsk the land 
journey takes ten days, while travel by water up the River Enisei 
might take three weeks. From the ostrog of Eniseisk down the 
river Enisei, passing the mouths of the rivers Podkamennaia Tun- 
guska, Elogui, and Nizhniaia Tunguska, it is a journey of ten days 
to the Turukhansk winter quarters in small vessels. On the river 
Podkamennaia Tunguska a winter quarters is established where 
the serving men from Eniseisk live to collect the Sovereign's fur 
tribute. From Turukhansk one travels two weeks along the Enisei 
River to the sea. 

From Narym to the town of Tomsk up the rivers Ob' and Tom 
the journey takes ten days. From the town of Tomsk to the ostrog 
of Kuznetsk it is a journey of ten days up the Tom River. From 
the town of Tomsk down the Tom River to the Ob' and up the Ob' 
River to the mouths of the Biia and Katun' one travels on a large 
boat for ten weeks, and at the mouths of both of these rivers there 
are evergreen forests. This place is suitable for the erection of a 
Great Sovereign's town or ostrog because the fields are good for 
agriculture. There is an abundance of various animals, both sables 
and foxes, and there are small rivers with beavers, so the Great 
Sovereign will receive a large profit. The River Biia flows from 
Lake Teletskoe, which can be crossed on a small craft in five days. 
Many natives wander near these places who do not deliver the 
tribute to the Great Sovereign. And they say that one travels from 
the mouths of the Biia and the Katun' across the steppe to the 
Chinese Kingdom in two months. There is actually a trail between 
the Kontaishin and Mungalsk [Mongolian?] settlements (ulusy), 
but the distance to the mountains is not known. From Tomsk one 
travels to the Mungalsk settlements in a month and a half, to the 
Kontaishin [Kontaisha?] settlements in two months; and from the 
Kontaishin settlements to the town of Tangut in two months. 

Appendix?) ^ A List of the More Important 
Monasteries in Their Relation to the River 
Systems and the Ostrogs 


River system 
(See App. i) 

Region of A. Volga, xxiv, 
xxv, xxviixxix; D. 
Western Dvina, xi- 
xviii; E.Velikaia, ii, in; 
E Shelon', i 


'lurievskii m. 

Antoniev m. 

Dukhov c. 

Khutynskii Varlaamskii m. 

Zverin Pokrovskii c. 

Skovorodskli m. 

Kirilov m. 

Panteleimonov m. 
Desiatin c. 
Klopskli Troitskii m. 
Viazhltskii m. 
Savvo-Visherskii m. 
Syrkov c. 
Derevenitskii m. 

Date of founding 






1355 or before 

Mentioned in the 

isth century 
i2th century 

i4th century 

i4th century 
i4th century 

1 Abbreviations here used are m. for monastery and c. for convent. The word 
"pustyn' " may be best translated as "retreat!' For references in regard to the 
Novgorod region see; A. Rado, Guide Book to the Soviet Union (New York, 1928), 
p. 337; I. Pushkarev, Opisanie rossiiskoi imperil (St. Petersburg, 1844), I:i, 28; 
I. Privol'ev, "Khutynskii monastyr' " Istoricheskii vestnik (St. Petersburg), XLIX 
(1892), 455; A. G. Slezkinskii, "Khutynskii monastyr'," ibid., XCIV (1903), 926; 
A. G. Slezkinskii, "Savvo-Visherskii monastyrr ibid., LXXXVI (1901), 270; Do- 
polneniia k aktam istoricheskim (12 vols., St. Petersburg, 1846-1872; hereafter 
cited as D.A.L), IX, 203; I. E Tiumenev, "Po puti iz Variag v Greki," Istoricheskii 
vestnik f LII (1893), 156. Russian chronicles mention about fifty more monasteries 
around Novgorod: Polnoe sobranie russkikh letopisei (24 vols., St. Petersburg, 
1846-1914; hereafter cited as P.S.R.L.), III, 5-253 passim., IV, 12-140 passim. In 
1386 the Novgorodians for strategic reasons burned twenty-four monasteries: 
P.S.R.L., IV, 94. 



^Uspenskii Tikhvinskii m. i6th century 
Dymskii Antoniev m. i2th century 

v Troitsko-Zelenskii m. 1 6th century 

^ " Besednyi Nikolaevskii m. i6th century 

Vaselievskii m. Mentioned in the 

i6th century 


[ Kirilov No voozerskii m. 1517 

. TT , I Nilosarskaia pustyn' i5th century 

A. Volga xxxn, xxxm <,..,,,.. 

Kirilov Beloozersku m. 1397 

[jFerapontov m. 14-th century 

fBorisoglebskii m. Mentioned in 1615 

A. Volga xxxn "1 Voskresenskii c. Mentioned in 1 647 

fGoritskii m. Mentioned in 1488 

A. Volga xxxi-xxxvii | Kamenny i m . Mentioned in 1488 


"Cherepovskii Voskresenskii m.Chartered in 1432 
Vyksenskaia pustyn' , Mentioned in the 

A. Volga xxxi-xxxvii 

i6th century 

Troitskii Ust'-Shekhonskii m. Mentioned in 1477 
Nikitskii m. Mentioned in 1477 

A. Volga xxviii-xxx Nikolaevskii Modenskii m. Very ancient 

A. Volga xxvii, xxviii Dukhovskii m. 1345 

2 Pushkarev, op. tit., In, 30-31; D.A.I., I, 119, 126, 220; Tiumenev, op. cit. f 
pp. 145-152; "Tikhvinskaia systema" Entsiklopedicheskii slovar' (hereafter cited 
as Entsik. slovar'), XXXIII: i, 278-279. 

s Pushkarev, op. czt, In, 6, 32; I. E Tiumenev, "Poezdka v Nilovu-Sorskuiu 
pustyn'," Istoricheskii vestnik, LXXIV (1896), 228; N. V-ko, "MonashestvoJ' 
Entsik. slovar', XIX:2, 726; DA J. f II, 64, III, 126; P.S.R.L., VI, 238; Komitet 
severa, Ocherki po istorii kolonizaisii severa (St. Petersburg, 1922), p. 14; Kirilov 
Beloozerskii m. "was one of the most important strategic points in the northern 
part of Russia": D. R., "Kirilo-Beloozerskii monastyr' J' Entsik. slovar', XV: i, x 13. 

4 V S. Ikonnikov, Opyt russkoi istoriografii (2 vols, in 4 books, Kiev, 1891- 
1908), II: i, 895; Pushkarev, op. cz't, I:i, 33; D.A.L, I, 220, 358. 

5 Pushkarev, op. cit., I:i, 33; A. Shchekatov, Geograficheskii slovar' rossiiskago 
gosudarstva (7 vols., Moscow, 1801-1809), IV, 636. 

Pushkarev, op. cit., I:i, 33-35. 




fKonevskiim. 1398 

I Lialikinskii m. Mentioned in 1573 

A. Volga xxx ^ Nikolskii m. Mentioned in 1573 

[Valaamskii m. Mentioned in 1597 

(Aleksandro-Svirskii Troitskii 1506 

Klimetskiim. igth century 

Paleostrovskii m. mh century 

JSpasskiim. 1 4th century 

ga m "\Syrinskii m. Mentioned in 1 647 


flosifov Volokolamskii m. 1479 
A. Volga xi \Voznesenskii m. 1572 or before 


... ,. flpatievskii Troitskii m. Mentioned in 1535 

A. Volga xxxvm-xh j Vo2dvizhe nskii m. Mentioned in l654 

A. Volga xlii Makar'evo-Unzhenskii m. i5th century 


r Arkhangelskii m. i5th century 

J. Northern Dvina i-xxiv 

Nikolaevskii Karelskii m. i5th century or 


Pertomlnskii m. 1599 

Antoniev Siiskii m. 1520 

^Chukchenemskii m. i5th century 

J. Northern Dvina i-xxiv; Jlvanovskii c. 
I. Onega vii |^Pokrovskii m. 

fErnetskii Blagoveshchenskii m. 
I. Onega vii ^Emetskii Predtechenskii c. 

7 K. V. Kudriashov, Russkii istoricheskn atlas (Moscow-Leningrad, 1928), table 
vn; Arkheograficheskaia Kommissiia, Akty istoricheskie (5 vols., St. Petersburg, 
x84i~i842, index, 1843; hereafter cited as AJ.), I, 349, V, 386; D.AJ. f I, 66, 235- 
236, III, 130; P.S.R.L., III, 233," A. E Marks, Bol'shoi vsemirnyi nastol'nyi atlas 
Marksa (St. Petersburg, 1904-1905), table 20; Ikonnikov, op. cit. f II: i, 894. 

8 P.S.R.L., IV, 152; Rado, op. tit., p. 109; DAJ. f I, 364; Komitet severa, op. cit., 
p. 40. 

Q D.A.L, III, 364; Komitet severa, op. cit., p. 14; P.S.R.L., V, 149. 
10 Pushkarev, op. tit., Irs, 26-28, 30, 32; Marks, op. cit.> table 16; A.I., I, 428, 
III, 82, IV, 56; Komitet severa, op. tit., pp. 37, 46. 




J. Northern Dvina iii; 
I. Onega vii 

C Troitskii m. 
Bogoslovskii m. 
Troitskaia pustyn' 
Predtechenskaia pustyn' 
Makarievskaia pustyn' 
Nikolaevskaia pustyn' 
Preobrazhenskii m. 
Troitskii m. 
Uspenskii m. 
Vvedenskii m. 
Voznesenskii m. 
Nikolaevskii m. 
Voskresenskii m. 
Spasskaia pustyn' na Boru 
Nikolaevskaia pustyn' 
Nikolaevskii m. 
Zosimo-Sawatieva pustyn' 


i7th century 

i7th century 
(second half) 




I. Onega i-vii 

("Krestnyi m. 
j Solovetskii m. 

LOshevenskii m. 


i4th century 
(first third) 


rUst'-Shchelinskaia pustyn' ? 
J. Northern Dvina xxiv j Krasnogorskii m. 1606 

I Arkhangelsk!! m. 

i7th century 

11 Pushkarev, op. tit., 1:2, 33-34; D.A.I., I, 34-35, IX, 206; "Troitskie monastyri" 
Entsik. slovar', XXXIII: 2, 874-877. 

12 Pushkarev, op. cit., 1:2, 35-36; N. L., "Solovetskii monastyr'," Entsik. slovar*, 
XXX:2, 782-784; "Kirilov Aleksandro Oshevenskii monastyrY' Entsik. slovar*, 
XV: i, 114; A.I., III, 72; D.A.I., V, 344; Kornitet severa, op. cit., p. 40. 

13 Pushkarev, op. cit., 1:2, 37; Kudriashov, op. cit.,, table vn. 




A. Volga xxxiv, xxxvii 

'Troitskii Kaisarov m. 
Dukhov or Spaso-Kamennyi 


Uspenskii or Gornyi c. 
Synzhemskii m. 
Pelshemskii m. 
Rabaganskii m. 
Spaso-Prilutskii m. 
Siamskii Rozhdestvenskii m. 
Kushtskii m. 
Verkolskii m. 
Zaonikievskaia pustyn' 
Illnskii m. 
Vologodskii Pesochnyi m. 


i6th century 

Mentioned in 1647 
I4th-i5th centuries 
I4th--i5th centuries 
i4th-i5th centuries 


i4th i5th centuries 

i4th-i5th centuries 


Mentioned in 1648 

Mentioned in 1615 


A. Volga xxxviii 

TPavIov Obnorskii m. 
J Arseniev m. 
Komiliev Komelskii m. 


A. Volga xxxvii 


fGlushitskii m. 1402 

JLopatovm. 1 5th century 

-j Semigorodskaia pustyn' i 5 th century 

(JDunikalova pustyn' 1679 


fKariazhemskii Nikolaevskii m . 1 535 

J. Northern Dvina xxii, I Soiginskii m. 1540 

xxiii 1 Vvedenskii m. Mentioned in 1682 

(jVymskii Arkhangelskii m. ? 


A. Volga xxxvii-xlvi 

("Arkhangelskii m. 
J loannovskii c. 
I Troitskii Gliadenskii m. 
[lankovskaia pustyn' 


i3th-i4th centuries 



14 Ikonnikov, op. cit. f II: i, 201, n. 6; Shchekatov, op. tit., I, 978; Pushkarev, op. 
cit.,, 1:4, 95, 99-105; T>AI. y III, 126; AJ.j I, 380, III, 60; ES.RJL., VI, 48. 

15 Pushkarev, op. cit. f 1:4, 104-105; A. V. Kruglov, "Poezdka v Kornilievo- 
Komelskii monastyr'," Istoricheskii vestnik, LXX (1897), 21 ^' 

16 Pushkarev, op. dt. f 1:4, 106-108. 

17 Pushkarev, op. cit., 1:4, no; D.A.I., X, 406; Kudriashov, op. cit. f table vn. 

18 Pushkarev, op. cit., 1:4, 114, 117; "Arkhangelskie monastyrir Entsik. 
II: i, 212; D.AJ., IV, 38, X, 211. 


J. Northern Dvina iii Spaso-Sumorin m. 1554 

fTobolskii Znamenskii m. 1587 
Zosimy i Sawatiia m. 1601 

A. Volga liv-lvii J Abalatskii m. 1 7th century 

Uspenskii c. i7th century 

LMezhdugorskii m. 1653 


jNikolaevskii m. i7th century 

A. Volga liv-lvii \Pokrovskii c. 1604 


f Nikolaevskii m . 1 7 th century 

A. Volga Iv, Ivii ^Pokrovskii c. 1604 


fTroitskii m. 1616 

A. Volga Iv, Ivii \innskiic. 1622 


J Uspenskii m. ? 

L.Ob'i-xi \Kazanskoi Bozh'ei Materi m. 1663 

L. Ob* i-xi Spasskii m. 1624 

19 Pushkarev, op. cit., 1:4, in. 

20 N. Abramov, "Materialy dlia istorii khristianskogo prosveshcheniia SibiriJ* 
Zhurnal ministerstva narodnago prosveshcheniia, LXXXI (1854), 27, 30-31; Sibir- 
skaia sovetskaia entsiklopediia (3 vols., Novosibirsk, 1929-1932), III, 506; Shche- 
katov, op. cit., 1, 7. 

21 Abramov, op. cit., p. 18; Sibirskaia sovetskaia entsiklopediia, III, 504; J. E. 
Fischer, Sibirskaia istoriia (St. Petersburg, 1774), pp. 231, 304-305. 

22 Abramov, op. cit., pp. 18, 23; Sibirskaia sovetskaia entsiklopediia, III, 506; 
Fischer, op. cit., p. 305; V. K. Andrievich, Istoriia Sibiri (5 vols., St. Petersburg, 
Irkutsk, Tomsk, Odessa, 1887-1889), I, 183. 

28 Abramov, op. cit., p. 23; Sibirskaia sovetskaia entsiklopediia, III, 506; Shche- 
katov, op. cit., VI, 370; Fischer, op. cit., p. 192. 

2 * Abramov, op. cit., pp. 24, 31; Fischer, op. &t., p. 304; Entsik. slovar', XXXIII: 
2, 491. 

25 Abramov, op. cit., p. 24; Fischer, o>. cit., p. 304. 



. . JRozhdestvenskii c. 16255 

M.Emsen-ix \Spasskiim. 


, , .. f Dalmatov-Uspenskii m. 1644 

A. Volga Iv, Ivn \Rafailovskii Troitskii m. 1651 

L. Ob' i-xi Troitskii m. 1656 

M. Enisei i ' Troitskii m. 1660 

M. Enisei i-ix Vvedenskii m. 1646 

L. Ob' i-xi Khristorozhdestvenskii m. 1648 

M. Enisei vii Troitskii m. 1663 

N. Lena i-x Spasskii m. 1659 


TVoznesenskii m. 1672 

M. Enisei v J Znamenskii c. 1693 

Posolskii Preobrazhenskii m. 1681 

20 Abramov, op. cit., pp. 24, 29; Andrievich, op. cit., I, 182; Shchekatov, op. cit., 
II, 420. 

27 Abramov, op. cit., pp. 29, 31; Fischer, op. cit., pp. 396-397; Shchekatov, op. 
cit., VI, 368. 

28 Abramov, op. cit., p. 31; Sibirskaia sovetskaia entsiklopediia, III, 506, 

20 Abramov, op. \cit., p. 31; Sibirskaia sovetskaia entsiklopediia, III, 506; Shche- 
katov, o^. cit. 3 VI, 370. 

30 Abramov, op. cit., p. 29. 

81 Loc. cit. 

8a Abramov, op. cit., p. 31; Shchekatov, op. cit,, III, 478. 

aa Abramov, op cit., p. 31; Sibirskaia sovetskaia entsiklopediia, III, 506-507. 

84 Abramov, op. cit., pp. 33-34; Sibirskaia sovetskaia entsiklopediia, III, 506; 
Shchekatov, op. cit., II, 805. 


M. Enisei v Troitskii m. 1681 

Q, Amur i-v Spasskii m. 1671 

N. Lena i x Spasskii m. i7th century 

A. Volga Iv Vvedenskii m. lyth century 

A. Volga Ivii Rozhdestvenskii m. i7th century 

35 Abramov, op. cit., p. 36; Sibirskaia sovetskaia entsiklopediia> III, 507; Shche- 
katov, op. cit., V, 865. 

36 F. Shperk, "Rossiia Dal'nego VostokaJ' Zapiski imperatorskogo russkogo geo- 
graftcheskogo obshchestva, XIV (1885), 60. 

37 Shchekatov, op. cit., I, 548. 

38 A. Dmitriev, "K poluvekovoi godovshchine smerti Petra Andreevicha Slov- 
tsovar Permskii krai, II (1893), 293; Fischer, op. cit.,, p. 304; Andrievich, op. cit. f 
I, 182. 

Appendix 6 & A List of Important 
Siberian Ostrogs 


River system Name Date of founding 

(See App. i) 

L. Ob' i-xi Abatskii 1 iyth century 

L. Ob' i-xi Achinskii 3 1621 

L. Ob' viii Belskii 3 1668 

K. Pechora v, vi Berezov* 1593 

L. Ob' i xi lalutorovskii 5 1630 

L. Ob' i-xi Isetskii 6 1650 

L. Ob' i xi Ishimskii 7 1630 (approx.) 

L. Ob' viii Ketsk 8 1597 

L. Ob' i xi Korkinskii 9 lyth century 

L. Ob' i-xi Kuznetsk 10 1618 

L. Ob' viii Makovsk 11 1618 

L.Ob' i-xi MeleskiP 1621 

L. Ob' xi Mangazeia 13 1610 

1 S. V. Bakhrushin, Ocherki po istorii kolonizatsii Sibiri v XVI i XVII w. (Mos- 
cow, 1927-1928), p. 173. 

*D.A.I., V, 420, VI, 316-319, VII, 341, VIII, 45. 

*D.A.I., VI, 314-315, 354. 

* G. E Mueller, Istoriia Sibiri (Moscow-Leningrad, 1937), pp. 346, 350, 358; 
Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp. 62-63, 7376; V. I. Ogorodnikov, Ocherk istorii Sibiri 
(3 vols. in 2 parts, Irkutsk, Vladivostok, 1920, 1924), II, 37. 

5 Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 36. 

1. E. Fischer, Sibirskaia istoriia (St. Petersburg, 1774), p. 396. 

7 Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 36. 

8 Fischer, op. cit., p. 196; Ogorodnikov, op. vit. f II, 39, 45; Mueller, op. cit., pp. 

Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 173. 

10 Mueller, op. cit., pp. 451-454; Fischer, op. cit. f p. 215; D.A.I., VI, 324-325, 
VII, 49, 50. 

11 Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 160. 

12 Fischer, op. cit., pp. 279-280. 

18 Mueller, op. cit., pp. 394, 395; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 38, 45; Fischer, op. 
cit., p. 206; Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp. 151-152; E N. Butsinskii, Mangazeia i Man- 
gazeiskii uezd (x6oi'~i645) (Kharkov, 1893), passim. 


L. Ob' i-xi Narym 1 * 1596 

K. Pechora vii Obdorsk 15 1 596 

A. Volga liv Pelym 16 1 593 

L. Ob' i-xi Surgut 17 1593 

L. Ob' i-xi Tara 18 1594 

L.Ob' i-xi Tarkhansk 10 1630 (approx.) 

L. Ob' i-xi Tebendinsk 20 1630 (approx.) 

A. Volga liv-lvii, 

L. Ob' i-xi Tobolsk 21 1587 

L. Ob' i~xi Tomsk 22 1604 

A. Volga Ivii Turinsk 23 1 600 

L. Ob' xi Turukhansk 24 1607 

A. Volga Ivii Verkhoturie 25 1598 


M. Enisei i-ix Abakansk 26 1676 

M. Eniseiv, vi Balagansk 27 1654 

M. Enisei v Barguzin 28 1648 

M. Enisei v, vi Bratsk 29 1 63 1 

M, Enisei vii Chichuiskii 80 1650 (approx.) 

14 Fischer, op. cit., p. 196; Ogorodnikov, op. vit* 9 II, 45; Bakhrushin, op. cit., 
p. 112; P. N. Butsinskii, K istorii Sibiri: Surgut, Narym i Ketsk do 1645 g. (Khar- 
kov, 1893), pp. 16-24. 

15 Ogorodnikov, op. cit, II, 37; Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 75. 

16 Mueller, op. cit., pp. 346-354; Ogorodnikov, op. cit. f II, 35-36. 

17 Butsinskii, K istorii Sibiri . . . , pp. 1-16; Fischer, op. cit., p. 178; Ogorodni- 
kov, op. cit., II, 38. 

18 Mueller, op. cit., pp. 354-361; Fischer, op. cit., p. 180; Ogorodnikov, op. cit. 9 


19 Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 36. 

21 Sibirskiia letopisi (St. Petersburg, 1907), pp. 42, 257; Mueller, op. vit. f pp. 
274-275; Fischer, op. cit, 9 p. 169; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 34. 

22 Mueller, op. cit., p. 312; Fischer, op. cit. f p. 209; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 39. 

23 Mueller, op. cit., pp. 383-385; Fischer, op. cit., p. 203; Ogorodnikov, op. cit. t 
II, 36. 

^ Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 1 14; Fischer, op. cit., p. 237. 

25 Mueller, op. cit., pp. 375-377; Fischer, op. vit. 9 p. 201; Ogorodnikov, op. cit. f 
II, 36. 

27 D.AJ., IV, 55; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 65. 

28 Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp. no, 137, 138; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 70. 

20 Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp, 137, 161; Fischer, op. cit., p. 350; Ogorodnikov, op. 
cit., II, 64. 
80 Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 128. 


M. Enisei v Eravninsk 31 Before 1675 

M. Enisei i-Ix Eniseisk 32 1619 

M. Enisei vi Ilimsk ** 1630 

L. Ob' i-x Inbatsk 34 1607 

M. Enisei v Irgensk 35 1652-1653 

M. Enisei i-ix Irkutsk 86 1652 

M. Enisei v Itankinsk (Itantsinsk) 37 Before 1682 

M. Enisei i-ix Krasnoiarsk 38 1629 

M. Enisei i-ix Kansk 80 1628 

M. Enisei v Kabansk* 1680-1690 

M. Enisei v Kiakhta 41 1727 

M. Enisei viii Nizhne-Viliuisk 42 1634 

M. Enisei v Nizhne-Udinsk 43 1647 

M. Enisei v, vi Rybnoi 44 1628? 

M. Enisei v Selenginsk 45 1667 

M. Enisei v Telembinsk 46 1658 

M. Enisei v, vi Ttmkinskii 47 ? 

M. Enisei vi Ust'-Kut 4 * 1631 

M. Enisei v Ust'-Prorva 49 1652 

81 Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp. 1 10, 139. 

32 Fischer, op. cit, f p. 377; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 45; Bakhrushin, op. cit., 
p. 160. 

83 Fischer, op. cit., p. 354; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 64; DAI., Ill, 303-304. 

M A. Shchekatov, Geograficheskii slovaf rossiiskago gosudarstva (7 vols., Mos- 
cow, 1801-1809), II, 757; K. V. Kudriashov, Russkii istoricheskii atlas (Moscow- 
Leningrad, 1928), table ix. 

35 F. Shperk, "Rossiia Dal'niago Vostoka? Zapiski russkago geograficheskago 
obshchestva (St. Petersburg, 1885, pp. 1-503), XIV, 57; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., 
II, 72. 

30 Fischer, op. cit, p. 557; Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 161; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., 
II, 65. 

**DAJ. t IX, 210; Shchekatov, op. cit., V, 863. 

88 Fischer, op. Kit., p. 282; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 45; Bakhrushin, op. cit., 
p. 161. 

89 Fischer, op. cit., p. 400; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 45. 
" Shchekatov, op. cit., V, 863. 

Shchekatov, op. cit., Ill, 1044. 

42 Kudriashov, op. cit., table ix. 

M Ogorodnikov, op. ciL, II, 66. 

u D.A.L, VIII, 176; Fischer, op. cit., p. 343. 

45 Bakhrushin, op', cit., p. 167; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 73. 

M Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 139; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 73. 

^ Shchekatov, op. cit., II, 805. 

48 Fischer, op. cit., p. 355. 

49 Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 72. 



M. Enisei v 
M. Enisei v 
M. Enisei v 
M. Enisei viii 

Ust'-Strelochnyi 50 1 650 

Verkhne- Angarsk 51 1 647 

Verkhne-Udinsk 52 1647 

Verkhne-Viliuisk 53 1634 


N. Lena vi 
P. Kolyma ii 
N. Lena i-x 
N. Lena viii-ix 
N. Lena vi vii 
N. Lena i-x 
N. Lena i-x 
P. Kolyma ii ' 
N. Lena iv, v 
N. Lena ix 
P. Kolyma i 
N. Lena vi, vii 
P. Kolyma i, ii 
N. Lena iv, v 
N. Lena i-x 
N. Lena vi-viii 

Amginsk 54 

Anadyrsk 55 

Bauntovsk 56 

Butalsk 57 

Dolonsk 58 

lakutsk 59 

Kirensk 60 

Nizhne-Kolymsk 61 

Olekminsk 62 

Okhotsk 03 

Penzhinsk * 

Selenbinsk 65 

Sredne-Kolymsk 06 

Tugirsk 67 

Tutursk 08 

Ust'-Aldansk 00 



Before 1674 













Before 1639 

50 Ogorodnikov, op. cit.,, II, 87. 

51 Ogorodnikov, op* tit., II, 69. 

52 Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 73. 
58 Shchekatov, op. cit., I, 822. 

54 Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 162. 

55 Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp. 132, 165. 
50 D.A .L, VI, 367. 

57 Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 163. 

58 Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 136. 

50 Fischer, op. cit., p. 352; Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp. 162, 164; Ogorodnikov, op. 
cit., II, 49. 

60 Kudriashov, op. cit., table ix; Shchekatov, op. cit., Ill, 477. 

61 L. S. Berg, Istoriia geograficheskogo oznakomleniia s iakutskim kraem 
(Leningrad, 1927), p, 8. 

02 Fischer, op. cit., p. 372; Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 49, 

03 Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 140; D.A.I., III, 331, 398, 400. 
Qk DAJ.,Vlll, 176. 

05 Bakhrushin, op. cit., pp. 133-134. 

68 Berg, op. cit., p. 8; Shchekatov, op. cit., V, \ 142. 

m DA.l. r III, 173, 261, IV, 89, 94. 

88 Fischer, op. ciL, pp. 357-358. 

69 ZX4J., II, 232. 


N. Lena vlii, ix Ust'-Maisk 70 Before 1661 

N. Lena vlii Ust'-UHisk 71 1639 

O. lana i, ii Verkhoiansk 72 1638 

N. Lenai-x Verkholensk 73 1642 

N. Lena vi, vii Verkhozeiskoe 74 1681 

P. Kolyma ii Verkhne-Kolynisk 75 i7th century 

(second half) 

O. lana ii Zashiversk 76 1639 

N. Lena i x Zhigansk 77 1633 


Q. Amur i v Achansk 78 1651 

Q.Amur i-v Albazin 1665 

Q. Amur i v Argunsk 80 1 655 

Q. Amur i-v Chita 81 End of i7th 


Q. Amur i-v Kumarsk 83 1652 

Q. Amur i v Kosogirskii 83 J 55 

Q. Amur i v Nemilenskoe 84 1682 

Q. Amur i v Nerchinsk 86 16531654 

Q. Amur i v Ust'-Dukichinskii 86 1682 

D.AJ. f IV, 247, VI, 404. 

71 Shperk, op. cit., p. 34. 

72 Kudriashov, op. cit., table ix. 

73 Ogorodnikov, op. cit.,11, 66; Shchekatov, op. cit., II, 805. 
D.AJ. f Vii, 368. 

7B Berg, op. cit., p. 8; Shchekatov, op. cit., V, 282-283. 
7(1 Kudriashov, op. cit., table ix; D.A.I., V, 337-339- 

77 Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 162. 

78 Shperk, op. cit. f p. 67; Ogorodnikov, op. cit. y II, 90. 

79 Shperk, op. cil. f pp. 41, 59; Bakhrushin, op. cit., p. 167. 

80 Shperk, op. cit.., p. 54. 

81 Bol'shaia sov. enlsik., LXI, 665. 

82 Shperk, op. cit., pp. 49, 52, 55. 

83 Shperk, op. cit. f p. 55. 
8 * Shperk, op. cit., p. 64. 

85 Shperk, op. cil. f p. 57; Ogorodnikov, op. cit. f II, 72. 
m Shperk, op. cit., p. 64. 



R. BoFshaia BoFsheretskii 87 1703 

R. Kamchatka Nizhne-Kamchatsk 88 1703 

R. Oliutora Oliutorskii 89 1714 

Petropavlovsk 00 i74 

R. Tigil Tigilsk 91 1775 

R. Kamchatka Verkhne-Kamchatsk 92 1697 


R. Ud Udsk 93 1680 

R. Taui Ust'-Tausk 94 ? 

87 Shchekatov, op. cit., I, 513. 

88 Shchekatov, op. cit., IV, 577. 

SB A native ostrog, several times attacked and finally captured by the Russians 
in 1714. S. V. Bakhrushin, "Istoricheskie sud'by lakutii," lakutiia (Leningrad, 
1927), p. 283 (9). 

00 Shchekatov, op. cit., IV, 1135. 

fll Shchekatov, op. cit., VI, 193. 

03 Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 106. 

SS D^[ ./., Ill, 83,* Ogorodnikov, op. cit., II, 50-51. 

94 Kudriashov, op. cit., table ix. 



c, convent o., ostrog 

1., lake p., portage 

m., monastery r., river 
v., village 



[Prepared with the assistance of Martine Emert and Allene Johnson] 

Abakansk o., 186 

Abalatskii m., 182 

Abatskii o., 185 

Achansk o., 189 

Achinsk o., 185 

Achmet, Khan of the Golden Horde 

(1480), 62, 65 
Agirka r., 170 
Aidar r., 58, 61, 162 
Aidarskaia, outpost, 156 
Akhtyrka, on fortified line, 64 
Akhtyrsk, 163 
Akutan Pass, 88 
Alaska, 88 
Alazeevo o., 174 
Alazeia r., 79, 174 
Albazin o., 189 
Aldan r., 78, 82-83, 149-50 
Aldanskii p., 149 

Aleksandro-Svirskii Troitskii m., 179 
Aleutian Islands, 88 
Alexander, Prince of Novgorod (Nev- 

skii), 25-26, 31,44 
Amazar r.-Niugzi r.p., 149 
Amginsk o., 78, 188 
Amur r., 82-83, 173, 175; Amur system, 

151; Amur r.-Enisei r., 151; Amur 

r.-Lena r., 151 
Anadyr r., 79, 81; Anadyr r.-Aniui r.p., 


Anadyrsk o., 79, 188 
Anatolia, 2 
Anegiske, see Onega 
Angara r., 81, 172-73; see also Tun- 

guska (Verkhniaia) r. 
Aniui r. Anadyr r.p., 151 
Antoniev rn. (Novgorod region), 177 
Antoniev Siiskii m., 179 
Arctic Ocean, 4, 8, 32, 39, 95-96 
Aremzinsk v., 170 
Argun' (Arkhunia) r., 83, 173 
Argunsk o., 189 

Arkhangelsk, 52-53; region, 179 

Arkhangelskii m. (Arkhangelsk re- 
gion), 179; (Pinega region), 180; 
(listing region), 181 

Arkhunia, see Argun* 

Arseniev m., 181 

Asia Minor, 2 

Athabaska L, 3, 4; r., 3 

Azov, Sea of, 58, 61, 64 

Babasan v., 170 

Bab'e L, on the Wiirttemberg Canal 

system, 95 
Baikal L, 81-83; Baikal l.-Shilka r. 

road, 83, 147, 173 
Bailiff of the Portage (Voloch'skyi 

Tiuri), 15, 31, 153 
Bakaev shliakh, 60, 156 
Bakhmutovskaia, southern frontier 

outpost, 156 

Balagansk o., 81, 173, 186 
Baltic-Caspian axis, 36; Moscow 

barred from, 41, 43 
Barabinsk, on the Transsiberian, 101 
Barancha r., 125 
Barguzin r., 82 

Barguzin (Barguzinsk) o., 82, 186 
Barysh r., on the southern frontier, 

159, 162 

Bauntovsk o., 188 
Belaia Kalitva r., 61 
Belaia Vezha (Sarkel), 19, 65 
Belgorod, 64, 163 
Bel Kolodez r., 161 
Beloe L, see Beloozero 
Beloozero 1., 26, 29-30, 39, 62, 117-18 
Belskii o., 185 
Belye Berega, outpost on the southern 

frontier, 157 

Berda r.-Konskaia r.p., 132 
Berestovaia r.-Severnyi Donets r.p,, 
126, 131 



Berezina r.-Rutoveha r.p., 23; Bere- 
zina r.-Ushacha r.p., 23, 128, 132 
Berezina, small, r., 23 
Berezov o., 69, 169-71, 185 
Berezovka r.-Nem r.p., 124, 142 
Besednyi Nikolaevskii m,, 178 
Bezhitsy, 31-32, 42, 47 
Biia r., 175 
Bitiugr., 61 
Black-Baltic Sea route, 16, 24; Russian 

expansion to, 5466 
Blagoveshchenskoe 1., 93 
Bludnaia r.~-Iudoma r.p., 150 
Bogoslovskii m. (Shenkursk region), 

Boino L, 133 

Bol'shaia Bereka r., 58, 112 

Bol'sheretskii o., 190 

Bolshoi Volochek p., 136 

Bolshma r.-Pidma r.p., 119, 139 

Bolva r., 109 

Borisoglebskii m., 178 

Boris, Prince of Tver (1445), 31 

Boris Godunov, Tsar, 50 

Borodavar., 118 

Borodino, Battle of, 23 

Borovaia r., 58, 61 

Borovensk o., 161 

Borovichi, 116 

Bratsk o., 81, 186 

Brianda (Brianta) r.-Niuemka r.p., 

149; 83 
Brosno 1., 133 
Bug, Zapadnyi, r., 127; Dnieper-Bug 

Canal, 127 
Bukhinskii p., 124 
Buriats, 81-82 
Burpee, Lawrence J., 2-3 
Butalsko., 188 
Buzha r.-Kliazma r.p., 112 
Byk r., 58, 65 
Bystraia r., 61 
Bystraia Sosna r,, 60, 61, 162 

Canals: importance of, 89-103; Upper 
Volga Waterway, 92, 115; Tikhvin 
Waterway, 92-93, 116; Mariinsk sys- 
tem, 93-95, 117; Northern Catherina 
Canal, 95, 123; Ob'-Enisei Canal, 97, 
145; Moscow-Volga, 99, 112-113; 
White Sea-Baltic Canal, 99; Tvertsa 

Canal, 100; projected canals: Rama- 
Pechora, 95-97, 124; Volga-Don, 99- 
100, 65, 107 

Canoemen, see Ushkuiniks 

Captain's Bay (Dutch Harbor), 88 

Carelen, see Karelia 

Casimir, King of Poland-Lithuania 
(1480), 62 

Caspian Sea, 4, 33, 35-36, 41; Caspian- 
Baltic trade route, 4, 33, 35; Caspian- 
Baltic axis, 36; Moscow barred from, 

Catherine II, the Great, 22, 66 

Chagoda r.-Volozhba r.p,, 116 

Chagodoshcha r., 116-17 

Charandskoe L, 119 

Charles XII (of Sweden), 52 

Chausse"es, land trails, 54 

Chechuisk p., 75 

Chelnova (Chelnava) r., 62, 160 

Cherekha r.-Sudoma r.p., 136-37; Che- 
rekha r.-Uza r.p., 43, 136-37 

Cherepovskii Voskresenskii m,, 178 

Chereva r.-Voloshozero (Voloshevo) 
Lp., 138 

Chernaia Kalitva r., 61 

Chernava r., 160 

Chernavsk, terminal of Kalmiusskaia 
Sakma, 61 

Chernoruchenka r., 115 

Cherta, continuous fortified line, 66 

Chervlennaia r., 65 

Chesha r.-Chizha r,p., 151 

Cheshskaia Gulf, 151 

Cheshskii p., 151 

Chichiusk (Chichiuskii) o., 75, 186; 
see Chiuchiui 

Chigla r., 61 

China, fur trade with, 85 

Chir r., 61 

Chirka r., 29, 143 

Chita o., 189 

Chiuchiui r., 173; see Chichiusk 

Chiusovaia (Chusovaia) r., 125, 144, 166 

Chizha r.-Chesha r.p., 151 

Chonar., 78, 148 

Chudskoe 1., 136 

Chukchenemskii m., 179 

Chulym r., crossed by the Transsiber- 
ian, 101 

Church, first in Siberia, 86 



Churchill r., 3 

Churka r.-Titea r.p., 148 

Chusovaia (Chiusovaia) r.~Pyshma r.p., 

125, 144; Chusovaia r.-Iset r.p., 125, 

144; Chusovaia Sylva r.-Zheravlia 

r.p., 125, 144 
Chusovskoe 1., 124 
Clearwater r., 3 
Columbia r., 3 
Constantinople (Tsargorod), n, 14, 19, 


Copori, see Kopor'e 
Coporie, see Kopor'e 
" Country -beyond-the-PortageJ' see Za- 


Crimea, Crimean Peninsula, 54, 64 
Crimean Tatars, 54; trails used by, 56 

61; 64 

Crusade, Fourth, 19 
Cumberland L, 3 

Dalmatov-Uspenskii m., 1 83 

Dankov, see Donkov 

Davy, Moret and, 2 

Dederin (Dedrina), 47 

Dedilov, 60, 61 

Dedrina, see Dederin 

Dem'iansk o., 172 

Derevenitskii m., 177 

Derzha r.-Ruza r.p., 32, 35, no 

Derzhkovskii p., 116 

Desiatin c, 177 

Desna r., 60, 108, 109; Desna r.-Iput' 
r.p., 131; Desna r.-Oster r.p., 131 

Devlet-Girei, Khan of the Crimean 
Tatars (1571), 62, 63 

Dezhnev, explorer, 79 

Diocese, first in Siberia, 86 

Diomede islands, 88 

Disna r., 128, 132; Disna r.-Miadel 
l.p., 132 

Dmitrov, 36 

Dnieper r., i, 5, 8, 13-14, 16, 18, 23, 
28, 35-36, 42, 58, 60; Dnieper sys- 
tem, 127-32; Dnieper-Dniester, 127; 
Dnieper-Vistula, 127; Dnieper-Bug 
Canal, 127; Dnieper-Niemen, 127- 
28; Dnieper-Western Dvina, 42, 128- 
30; Dnieper-Volga, 42, 130-31; Dnie- 
per-Dnieper, 131; Dnieper-Don, 
131; Dnieper-Sea of Azov, 131-32; 

Dnieper-Luchesa r.p., 23, 133; Dnie- 
per r. Vazuza r.p., 113, 130; Dnieper 
r. Veritsa(?) r.p., 129, 133 

Dolgoe L, 115, 118, 139; Dolgoe l.-Vo- 
lotskoel.p., 118, 139 

Dolonsk o., 188 

Don r., 36, 56, 58, 60-62, 64-66; Don 
system, 126; Don-Dnieper, 126; Don- 
Volga, 126; Don r.-Shat r.p., 108, 

Donets r., 60-61, 64-66; Severnyi Do- 
nets r.-Berestovaia r.p., 126, 131; 
Severnyi Donets r.~Seim r.p., 126, 
131; 163 

Donkov (Dankov), 61, 63 

Donskaia o., 65 

Donskoi, see Ivanovich, Dmitri 

Dorogobuzh, 23 

Drisa r., 135 

Drut' r.-Obol r.p., 129, 133; Drat' r.- 
Usvitsa r.p., 129, 132 

Dryginskaia Doroga, 157 

Dubna r., 113 

Dukhov or Spaso-Kamennyi m., 181 

Dukhov c. (Novgorod region), 177 

Dukhovskii m. (Borovichi region), 178 

Dunikalova pustyn', 181 

Dutch Harbor (Captain's Bay), 88 

Dvina r., see Northern Dvina, Western 

Dvin'e l.-Kunia r.p., 134, 137 

Dvinka r., 134 

Dymskii Antoniev m,, 178 

Dzhurich r.-Severnaia KeFtma r.p., 
123, Hi 

Egypt, 2 

Ekaterinburg (Sverdlovsk), 95, 100 

Elan' r., 61 

Elets r.-Sob* r.p., 29, 144 

Elogui r., 145, 175 

Eloguiskii p., 145 

Elovka r., 124 

Elsha r.-Votria r.p., 130, 133 

Embakh r., 1 36 

Emenets L, 114, 135; Emenets l.-Oze- 

rishchel.p., 138 
Emenkar., 135 

Emetskii Blagoveshchenskii m., 179 
Emetskii Predtechenskii c., 179 
Emetskoe L, 29 


Emtsa r.~Onega r.p., 29, 140 

Enisei r., 73, 75, 145-48, 151, 175; Enisei 
system, 145-48; Enisei~Ob', 145-46; 
Enisei-Amur, 147; Enisei-Lena, 147- 
48, 151; Enisei r.-Piasina r.p., 148, 

Eniseisk o., 73, 75, 78, 81, 83, 146, 171- 

72; 175, 187; Eniseisk people, 83 
Entala r.-Vokhma r.p., 121, 141 
Entrepreneurs (Opytovshchiks), 73 
Epifan, 63, 158 
Erakleia l.-Ingoda r.p., 147 
Esaulovskaia-Aksai r., 65 
Esthonia, 48, 50 
Estland, see Esthonia 
Eravinsk o., 187 
Eurasia, natural pivot of, 36 
Ezerishche L, 135 

Ferapontov m., 178 

Fertile Crescent, % 

Finland, 48-49, 53 

Finland, Gulf of, 44-46, 92 

Finns, 34 

Fords, in the advance to Black Sea, 64; 

Fortified Line of 1571, see Line of 1571 

Fur trade, 8, 28, 67, 84-85, 88; expan- 
sion-exhaustion tempo, 30; Moscow, 
41; Novogorod, 41; bootleg, 88; mar- 
kets in Leipzig and in China, 85; 
statistics on Russian furs, 85-86; furs 
pay administrative expenses of Si- 
beria, 86; see also lasak 

Galich Mountains, on the southern 

frontier, 157 
Germans, Novgorod advances against, 

20-21; Baltic Germans, 26, 44 
Glubokoe, 23 
Glushitskii m., 181 
Gnezdovo, 16 
Godunov, Tsar Boris, 50 
Golden Horde, 41, 62 
Gonam r., 82, 149 
Goritskii m., 178 
Goriun r., 93 
Gor'kii, 99 

Gornyi c. (Vologda region), 181 
Gorodenskoe Gorodishche, on the 

southern frontier, 159 

Govniukha r.-Ukhta r.p., 142, 143 

Grachi o., 65 

Gridnevo, 23 

Gudanow, Boris; see Godunov, Boris 

Gustavus Adolphus, Orebro (1617) 
speech, 47-49; Stockholm (1617) 
speech, 49-52; understood signifi- 
cance of rivers, 47-52 

Gzhat' r., 23, 36, 113, 130; Gzhat' r.- 
Obsha (?) r.p., 113, 130; Gzhat' r.~ 
Voria r.p., 23, 36, 113 

Hanseatic League, 27 

Hedeby, 14 

History, course of Russian, 103-104 

Hotynka r.-Luga r.p., 137 

Hudson Bay, 3 

Huron L, 3 

lablonnoi range, 82-83 

lablonov, 64 

lagodna, settlement on the southern 

frontier, 157 
lakovlevskii Forest, on the southern 

frontier, 158 

lakroma r.-Kliazma r.p., 113 
lakutsk o., 78, 81-83, 173-74, 188; mili- 
tary commanders of, 82-83 
lal-Mal peninsula, 29 
lalutorovskii o., 185 
lama (Jama), later called lamburg, 45- 


lamanetsl., 114 
lamburg, see lama 
lamnoel., 116 
lamysh Salt Lake, 168 
lana r., 79, 150, 173; lana system, 150; 

lana r.-Lena r.p., 150; lana r.-Indi- 

girka r.p., 150 
lankovskaia pustyn', 181 
laroslavl, 38 
lasak, tribute in furs, 68, 73, 75, 84; 

165-175 passim; see Fur trade 
lasino o., 116 
lasolda r.-Shara r.p., 127 
latriia r., 30, 143-44; latriia r.-Shchu- 

gor r.p., 143-44 
lauza r.-Kliazma r.p., 1 1 1 
lavonr., 115 
lazholbitse v., 42 
Iksha r., 99 



Him r., 75, 81, 147; Him r.-Muka r.p., 

81, 147 

Ilimsk o., 75, 187 
Il'inskii c. (Tiumen region), 182 
Il'inskii m. (Vologda region), 181 
Ilmen L, i, 8, 13, 32, 44 
Ilmer, see Ilmen 
Ilovlia r., 65, 107, 126; Ilovlia r.- 

Kamyshinka r.p., 107, 126 
Ilovskii Forest, on the southern fron- 
tier, 163 

Ilych r.~Sosva r.p., 143-44 
Inbatsk o., 187 
Indigirka r., 79, 150; Indigirka r.-Iana 

r.p., 150 

Ingoda r.-Erakleia l.p., 147, 173 
Insar, 64 

loannovskii c., 181 
losifov Volokolamskii m., 179 
Ipatievskii Troitskii m., 179 
Iput* r. -Desna r.p., 131 
Irgen 1., 82, 147 
Irgensk (Irgenskii) o., 147, 187 
Irkut r., 81 

Irkutsk o., 81, 173, 187 
Irtysh r., 67, 69, 124-25, 168, 170 
Iset r.-Chusovaia r.p., 125, 144 
Isetskii o., 185 
Ishimskii o., 185 
Isna r,, 62 
IstochinoL, 115 

Istra r., 15, 32; Istra r.-Lama r.p., 111 
Itankinsk (Itantsinsk) o., 187 
Itantsinsk (Itankinsk) o., 187 
Itkla r., 93 
ludoma r., 78, 150; ludoma r.-Blud- 

naia r.p., 150; -Urak r.p., 150 
ludomskii Krest p., 150 
lugr., 120-22 
lugria, 30-31,34 
lukagirs, 79 

lurievskii m. (Novgorod region), 177 
luza r.-Sharzhenga r.p., 120, 141 
luzhnaia Kel'tma r., 123 
luzhnaia Myl'ia r.-Severnaia Myl'ia 

r.p., 142-43 
luzhnaia Mylva r.-Severnaia Mylva 

r.p., 142-43 

Ivan III, the Great (1469), 42-43, 62 
Ivan IV, the Terrible, 43; Livonian 

War, 44-45 

Ivangorod (Iwanogrod, Ivanogrod), 44- 

47* 49-51 
Ivan'kovo r., on the Moscow-Volga 

Canal, 99 

Ivanogrod, see Ivangorod 
Ivanovich, Dmitri, Grand Prince of 

Moscow, hero of Kulikovo, 56 
Ivanovskii c. (Arkhangelsk region), 179 
Iwanogrod, see Ivangorod 
Izhnia r., and v., 142; 171 
Izhora r., 26 
Izium, 58; founded, 64 
Iziumskaia Sakma, 58, 60, 65, 160, 161 

Jama, see lama 

Kabansk o., 187 

Kadiak (Kodiak), 88 

Kakolna r., on the southern frontier, ' 


Kalka r., 20 

Kalmius r., 58, 61; Kalmius r.-Voch'ia 
r.p., 131 

Kalmiusskaia Sakma, 56, 58, 160-61 

Kaluga, on old fortified line, 62 

Kama r., 29, 30, 67, 69, 121-25, 141; 
Kama r.-Uzhga r.p., 122; Kama- 
Vishera-Lozva p. route, 69 

Kamar r., 174 

Kamen*, Ural Mountains, 171 

Kamennyi Ford, 159; m., 178; p., 144 

Kamshino L, 135 

Kamyshinka r., 65; Kamyshinka r.- 
Ilovlia r.p., 107 

Kan r., 75, 101 

Kansk o., 75, 187 

Kara, Gulf of, 151 

Karachev, 159 

Karbatka r., on the Wurttemberg Ca- 
nal system, 95 

Karelia (Karelian Lakes), 45, 51 

Kargonaeva r., 159 

Kariazhemskii Nikolaevskii m., 181 

Karpov, outpost, 64, 161 

Kas' r., 97, 145-46,* Kas -Kef Canal, 97; 
Kas' r.-Ket' r.p., 145-46 

Kashira, on old fortified line, 62 

KasimovFord, 160 

Kasplia 1. and r., 13, 16, 22, 130 

Katun' r., 175 

Katym r.,-Zeia r.p., 149 


Katynka r., 13, 16, 22-23, 130, 133; 
Katynka r,-Krapivka r.p., 23, 130, 


Kaurdato., 169 
Kavast r.-Paala r., 136 
Kazan, 43, 62; Tatar Khanate of, 41 , 166 
Kazanskoi Bozh'ei Materi in. (Tomsk 

region), 182 

Kel'tma r., luzhnaia, 123; Severnaia, 
123; Severnaia Kel'tma r.-Dzhurich 
r.p., 141; Northern and Southern 
Kel'tma, 95 

Kern r. } 145; Kem r.-Ket' r.p., 146 
Kena r., 29, 138 
Kenozero 1., 29, 138 

Kesadra r., 116; Kesadra r.-S'ezzha r.p., 

Keshemskoe 1., 95 

Kef r., 72-73; i45~4 6 > ^ Ket'-Kas' 
Canal, 97; Ket' r.-Toma r.p., 145; 
Kef r.-Kas' r.p., i45~4: 6 ; Ket ' T -~ 
Enisei r.p., 145, 172 

Ketsk o., 72-73, 172 

Kexholm, 45~47> 5~5 l 

Keza r.-S'ezzha r.p., 116, 138 

Khabarov, E. P., explorer, 83 

Khamun r., 174 

Khatanga r.-Piasina r.p., 148 

Khazars, 19 

Khilka r., 82, 147, 173 

Khimka r., 99 

Khmelnitsa r.-Tutka r.p., 120, 140 

Kholka r., 161 

Khoper r., 61 

Khotmyshskoe Gorodishche, 162 

Khot'slavskii p., 116 

Khristorozhdestvenskii m., 183 

Khupta r,-Riasa r,p., 107, 126 

Khutynskii Varlaamskii m., 177 

Khvalin Sea, see Caspian Sea 

Khvost r.-Vydra r.p,, 130; 133 

Kiakhtao., 187 

Kichug r.-Maramitsa r.p., 121, 141 

Kiev (ox Kievan Russia), 3, 14, 24-25, 
131; Kievan state, 11-24 

Kirengar.,75, 173 

Kirensk o., 75, 188 

Kirghiz tribes, 72 

Kirilov m. (Novgorod region), 177 

Kirilov Beloozerskii m., 178 

Kirilov Novoozerskii m., 178 

Kirtas r., 143 

Kliazma r. 3 35-36, 38, 111-13; Kliazma 
r.-Skhodnia r.p., m; Kliazma r.- 
lauza r.p., 111; Kliazma r.-Buzha 
r.p., 112; Kliazma r.-Vlena r.p., 113; 
Kliazma r.-Iakroma r.p., 113 

Klimetskii m., 179 

Klopskii Troitskii m., 177 

Kobelsha r., 157 

Kobra r.-Lunia r.p., 122, 141 

Kodiak (Kadiak), 88 

Kokshenga r., 139-40; Kokshenga r.- 
Sukhona r.p., 140 

Koliazin, 46 

Koloksha r.-Pleshcheevo Lp., 112 

Kolomak r., 58, 156 

Kolomna, 36, 38; seizure of, 38; cus- 
toms duties, 38 

Kolotsa r., 22 

Kolotskii m., 23 

Kolp' r.-Lid' r.p., 117 

Kolpna r., 158 

Kolyma r,, 79, 150-51; Kolyma system, 
150-51; Kolyma-Penzhina, 150; Ko- 
lyma-Anadyr, 151 

Kolva r., 29, 97, 124; see also Visherka 
r., 29 

Konevskii m., 179 

Konskaia r.-Berda r.p., 132 

KonskieVodyr., 58 

Kontaishin, settlements, 175 

Kopor'e, 47-52 

Kopyiov, explores Aldan r., 78 

Korga r., 174 

Korkinskii o., 185 

Korniliev Komelskii m., 181 

Korocha o., 64; r., 16 1 

Korotkii Volok p., 118-19 

KorotkoeL, 118 

Korotoiak, 163 

Korytna r., 158 

Koryzha r,, 157 

Kosha r -Voloclinia r.p., 115 

Kosogirskii o., 189 

Kostroma r., 31, 3 8 ~39 119-20, 140; 
Kostroma r.-Tolshma r.p., 120, 140 

Kovzha r., 29, 93, 117; Kovzha r.-Vyte- 
gra r.p., 117; Kovzha r.-Beloe L, 29 

Kozelsk, on old fortified line, 6a 

Kozdskaia abatis, 16 1 

Kozlov, 64, 65, 160 



Krapivka (or Lelevka) r., 16, 23, 130, 
133; Krapivka r.-Katynka, 16, 23, 
130, 133 

Krasivaia Mecha r., 56 

Krasnogorskii m., 180 

Krasnoiarsk o., 78, 81-82, 171, 175, 187 

Krestnyi m., 180 

Krivoi Bor, outpost on the southern 
frontier, 157 

Krugloe l.-Volochanka r.p., 146 

Krupino 1., 93 

Krynka r.-Volch'ia r.p., 132 

Kubenskoe I., 29-30, 118 

Kuchum, Tatar Khan of Sibir, 68 

Kudanga r, Pyshcug r.p., 121, 141 

Kulenga (Kulinga) r.- Nizhniaia Tun- 
guska r.p., 147 

Kulikovo, plain of, battlefield and por- 
tage, 56 

Kuloi r., 29, 142; Kuloi r.-Pinega r.p., 
29, 142 

Kumarsk o., 189 

Kunia r., 16, 134, 137; Kunia r.-Usviat 
r.p., 134, 137; Kunia r.~Dvin'e r.p., 

*34> 137 
Kupa r., 147 
Kuprino L, 16, 130 
Kurgan, on the Transsiberian, 101 
Kurile Islands, 88 
Kuriakr., 61 
Kursk, 63 
Kushtskii m., 181 
Kust, outpost on the southern frontier, 


Kuta r., 147, 173 

Kuzernkina Dubrova, outpost, 158 
Kuznetsk o., 72, 185 

LacheL, 118-19, 139; Lache l.-Vytegra 

r.p., 139 
Ladoga (Nevo) 1., 13, 26, 29, 44-46, 

Laduga L, see Ladoga 1. 
Lama r., 15, 32, 35, 111; Lama r.-Vo- 

loshna r.p., in; Lama r.-Istra r.p., 


Lapkaev, 173-74 
Lebedino L, on the Tikhvin Waterway, 


Lelevka (Krapivka) r., on Western 
Dvina-Dnieper route, 16, 130 

Lena r., 75, 78-81, 83, 148-50, 173-74; 

Lena system, 148-50; Lena-Enisei, 

148; Lena-Amur, 148-49; Lena- 

Ul'ia, 149; Lena-Okhota, 150; Lena 

r. lana r.p., 150 
Leningrad (St. Petersburg), 36, 100; 

Leningrad-Moscow Railroad, 92, 100 
Lenskii p., 147 
Lesnoi Voronezh r., 160 
Lezha r., 119-20, 140; Lezha r.~Obnora 

r.p., 119, 140; Lezha r.-Monza r.p., 

120, 140 

Lialikinskii m., 179 
Lid' r.-Kolp' r.p., 117 
Lijfland, see Livonia 
Likhvin, on old fortified line, 62 
Line, of 1571, 63-66, 155-59; ( f l6 37~ 

47), 160-61; (of 1571-1642), 162-63 
Lipovetskii Forest, 159 
Lipovitsa r., 160 
Lithuania (Lithuanians), 21-22, 41-42, 

62; see also Niemen 
Liubech Convention (1097), 17 
Liubosha r., 158 
LiutoL, 116; r., 116 
Livna r., on the southern frontier, 157 
Livny, 63, 160 

Livonia (Livonian War), 44-45, 49 
Lodenitsa, see Lodyzhnitsa 
Lodyzhnitsa (or Lodenitsa), 16 
Lomov r., 162; Nizhnii, 160; Verkhnii, 

160; see Lornova 
Lomova r., on the southern frontier, 

159, 162; see Lomov 
Lopasnia r., 35, no; Lopasnia r.- 

Pakhra r.p., 35, 1 10 
Lopatov m., 181 
Lovat' r., 5, 8, 13, 16, 18, 28, 135, 137- 

38; Lovat* system, 137-38; Lovat'- 

Volga, 137; Lovat '-Western Dvina, 

28, 137; Lovat' r.-Usmen l.p., 18, 135, 


Lower Tunguska r., see Tunguska r. 
Lozva r., 69, 124, 144; Lozva r.~Vishera 

r.p., 124, 144 
Lozvinsk o., 69 
Luchanskoe l.-Otolovo l.p., 133; Luch- 

anskoe 1 -Zhadenie l.p., 133, 137 
Luchesa 1., 23, 129; Luchesa l.-Dnieper 

r.p., 23, 129; Luchesa r. -Dnieper r.p., 

23, 129, 133 



Luga r., 44, 137; Luga r.-Hotynka r.p., 

137; Luga r -Soba r.p., 137 
Lunia r., 122, 141; Lunia r.-Kobra r.p., 

122, 141 
Luza r., 122 

Mackenzie r., 3 

Maia r., 78, 83, 149-50 

Makar'evo-Unzhenskii m., 179 

Makarievskaia pustyn', 180 

Makovsk o., 73, 145, 172, 185 

Malaia Nerl* r., 112 

Malyi Volochek p., 136 

Manchus, 84 

Mangazeia, 72-73, 75, 171, 185 

Maramitsa r.-Kichug r.p., 121, 141 

Mariinsk System, of canals, 93 

Matko 1., 99 

Media r., 60, 62, 157 

Mechoshnaia o., protects portage from 
the Volga to the Don, 65 

Medvezhia Gora, on railway parallel- 
ing the White Sea-Baltic Canal, 100 

Meleskii o., 185 

Merchik r., 60 

MerF r., 60 

Meshchera, southern frontier town, 

Mesopotamia, 2; Russian, see Mezh- 


Mestilov Gates, 159 
Mezen, Gulf of, 151 
Mezen r., 29, 143 
Mezha r., 130 
Mezhdugorskii m., 182 
Mezhduriechie, Russian Mesopotamia, 

Mezhevaia Utka r.-Rezh(?) r.p., 125, 


Mezhvoloch'e L, 116 
Miadel L, 128; Miadel L-Disna r.p., 


Miadelkar., 128 
Minsk, Russian armies fail to meet at, 


Mississippi r., 3 
Mius r., 132 
Modlona r., 118 
Mokoshevichi, outpost, 157 
Moksha r., 62 
Mokshanskii Forest, 159 

Molochnye Vody r., 58 

Molodovar., 159 

Mologa r., 32, 39, 92, 116-17 

Moloma r., 121 

Molosno 1., 135 

Monasteries, 4; in the struggle between 
Moscow and Novgorod, 39; list of, 
177-84; Novgorod region, 177; Tikh- 
vin region, 178; Beloozero region, 
178; Cherepovets region, 178; Usti- 
uzhna region, 178; Borovichi region, 
178; St. Petersburg-Olenets regions, 
179; Moscow region, 179; Kostroma 
region, 179; Arkhangelsk region, 179; 
Shenkursk region, 180; Onega region, 
180; Pinega region, 180; Vologda re- 
gion, 181; Griazovets region, 181; 
Kadnikov region, 181; Solvychegodsk 
region, .181; Ustiug region, 181; 
Totma region, 182; Tobolsk region, 
182; Verkhoturie region, 182; Tur- 
insk region, 182; Tuimen region, 182; 
Tomsk region, 182; Tara region, 182; 
Eniseisk region, 183; Isetsk region, 
183; Berezov region, 183; Turuk- 
hansk region, 183; Krasnoyarsk re- 
gion, 183; Kirensk region, 183; 
lakutsk region, 183; Irkutsk region, 
183; Selenginsk region, 184; Albazin 
region, 184; Bratsk region, 184; Nevi- 
ansk region, 184; first in Siberia, 86; 
see by monasteries, ostrogs 

Monza r.-Lezha r.p,, 120, 140; Monza 
r.-Shuia r.p., 120, 140 

Moret and Davy, 2 

Moscow, 3, 5, 15, 33; pivot of Eurasian 
empire, 35-88; crossroads of water- 
ways and trunk lines, 36; capital, 35- 
36; domination of upper and middle 
Volga, 36, 38; domination of Cas- 
pian-Baltic axis, 41-54; silk and fur 
trade, 41; struggle with Novgorod, 
33, 38-43; fur tribute, 84; China 
trade, 85; raids by Moscow into Si- 
beria, 84; expansion to world em- 
pire, 54-88; expansion to Black Sea, 
54-66, 155-163; expansion to Pacific, 
66-88; port of five seas, 97; Moscow- 
Volga Canal, 97-99; Moscow-St. 
Petersburg (Leningrad) Railroad, 



Moskva (Moscow) r., 15, 18, 23, 32, 35 
36, 38, 99, 110-11; Moskva r.-Protva 
r.p., 23, 35, iio~n; Nizhnii Nov- 
gorod route, 36, 38 

Mozh r., 60 

Mozhaisk, 23; seizure of by Moscow, 
38; customs duties at, 38 

Mshaga r., 44, 137 

Msta r., 15, 28, 32, 38, 92, 115-16; Msta 
system, 115-16; Msta r.-Volga r.p., 
115-16, 138; Msta r.-Pechenevo l.p., 
116, 138; Msta r.~Tvertsa r.p., 32 

Mstino L, 92; Mstino l.-Tsna r.p., 115, 

Mstislav (first son of Vladimir Mono- 
makh), 17 

Mstislavoviches, family of princes, 17 

Mtsensk, outpost, 60, 64, 158 

Muka r., 147, 173; Muka r.-Ilim r.p., 

Mukhovets r. Pina r.p., 127 

Mungalsk (Mongolian) settlements, 


Mungut, Chinese town, 174 
Muravskii Shliakh, 56-61, 63, 65, 156- 


Mutnaia r.-Zelenaia r.p., 29, 151 
Myl'ia r., luzhnaia Myl'ia, 142-43; Sev- 

ernaia Myl'ia, 142-43 
Mylva r., lushnaia Mylva, 142-43; Sev- 

ernaia Mylva, 142-42 
Mzha r., 156 

Naharina p., 2 

Napoleon's march to Moscow, 22, 100 

Narfwen, see Narva 

Narfweske r., see Narova r. 

Narfwiske r., see Narova r. 

Naroch L, 128, 132; r., 128, 132 

Narova r., 44, 49-51 

Narva, 44-45, 49*-5i 53J Battle of, 52 

Narviske r., see Narova r. 

Narwen, see Narva 

Narym o., 72, 17071, 175, 186 

Nasva r. 135-36; Nasva r.-Usha r.p., 

138; Nasva r.~Velikaia r.p., 136 
Naul r., 174 
Navolok L, at portage between the 

Keza and the S'ezzha, 116 
Neiva (or Rezh?) r.-Mezhevaia Utka 

r.p., 125, 144 

Nelson r., 3 

Nem' r., 29, 123-24; Nem' r.-Berezovka 
r.p., 124, 142 

Nema (Nem' or Nef) r., 123-24 

Nemilenskoe o., 189 

Nepriadva r., 56, 158 

Nercha r., 82, 173 

Nerchinsk o., 82-83, 189; Treaty of, 83 

Nerl' r., Bolshaia, 112; Malaia Nerl' r- 
Solma r.p., 112 

Neruch r., 109, 158 

Neva, 13, 25-26; Prince Alexander of 
Novgorod defeats Swedes on the, 44; 
gives Russians direct access to Bal- 
tic, 45-46; in Swedish hands, 51-52; 
in Russian hands, 53 

Nevel L, 135 

Nev'ia o., 166; r., 166 

Nevo L, see Ladoga L 

Newland (also Nyland), 50 

New Mariinsk Canal, 93 

Nicholas I, instructs building of Mos- 
cow-St. Petersburg Railroad, 100 

Niemen r., ancient axis of Lithuania, 

Nienshants, site of St. Petersburg (Len- 
ingrad), 45-46, 52-53 

Nikitskii m. (Cherepovets region), 178 

Nikolaevskaia pustyn' (Shenkursk re- 
gion), 180 

Nikolaevskii m. (Shenkursk region), 

Nikolaevskii m. (Turinsk region), 182 

Nikolaevskii m. (Verkhoturie region), 

Nikolaevskii Karelskii m., 179 

Nikolaevskii Modenskii m., 178 

Nikolskii m., 179 

Nilosarskaia pustyn*, 178 

Nipissing L, 3 

Nitsa r., 125 

Niuemka r.-Brianda (Brianta) r.p., 149 

Niugzi (Niugchi, Niunzi, Niunchi, Ni- 
uga, Niuzia) r.-Amazar r.p., 149; 
Urka (Ura, Ui) r.p., 148 

Niukhcha, 53 

Niukria r., 174 

Nizhne-Kamchatsk o., 190 

Nizhne-Kolymsk o., 79, 188 

Nizhne-Udinsk o., 82, 187 

Nizhne-Viliuisk o., 187 



Nizhnee o., 174 

Nizhnii Bratsk o., 172 

Nizhnii Novgorod, 36, 38; acquired by 
Moscow, 38-39; beginning of old 
fortified line, 62 

Nizhniaia Tunguska r., see Tunguska 

Nogai country, the, 64 

Nogai Tatars, 54, 58-61 

Nogaiskaia Doroga, 56, 60-61, 65, 159 

Normans, in the commercial domain 
of Constantinople, 19 

North America, Russian expansion in, 

Northern Catherina Canal (Severo- 
Ekaterininskii), 95 

Northern Dvina, 39, 43, 93-94, 140-42; 
country, 43; system of canals, 93-94; 
system of rivers, 140-42; Northern 
Dvina-Onega, 140; Northern Dvina- 
Voloshka, 140; Northern Dvina- 
Northern Dvina, 140-41; Northern 
Dvina-Pechora, 142; Northern 
Dvina-White Sea, 142 

Northern Kel'tma r., 95; see Kel'tma r. 

Nosvar., 135 

Ndteborg, see Oreshek 

Noteburg, see Oreshek 

Novgorod, 3; region, 14; boundaries of, 
15, 20; gateway to Europe and the 
Urals, 25-34; colonizing center, 26; 
river boatmen of, 27; on verge of 
hunger, 28, 31-32; districts of, 28; 
trappers of, 30; Ilmen region, 31, 
33; fur empire of, 34; sphere of in- 
fluence, 34, 38; canoemen or braves 
of, 39; relations and struggle with 
Moscow, 41-42; in Swedish hands, 
46-47, 51; grain for, 54; raids by, 84 

Novo- Arkhangelsk (Sitka) o., 88 

Novo-Bogoroditsk o., 65 

Novonikolaevsk, see Novosibirsk 

Novosibirsk (Novonikalaevsk), on 
Transsiberian, 101 

Novosil, outposts sent out from, 158 

Novyi Torg, see Torzhok 

Nydyb r,-Volosnitsa r.p., 122, 141 

Nyen, see Neva 

Nyland, see Newland 

Nystadt, Treaty of, 22, 44, 53 

Ob', Gulf of, 146, 151 

Ob' r., 29-30, 67, 69, 72-73, 97, 124-25, 
143-46, 169, 171, 175; Ob' system, 
144-46; Ob-Pechora, 143-44; Ob'- 
Volga, 124-25, 144; Ob'-Enisei, 145- 
46; Ob'-Enisei Canal, 97, 100, 145-46 
Obdorsk o., 72, 171, 186 
Obnora r.-Lezha r.p., 119, 140 
Obol r., 135; Obol r.-Drut' r.p., 129, 


Obsha r.~Gzhat' r.p., 113, 130 
Odoev, on old fortified line, 62 
Odrovo 1., 135 
Oemokon (Omolon) r., 150 
Oginskii Canal, 127 
Ognega, see Onego 1. 
Oka r., 32, 35-36, 38, 56, 60, 62, 64; 

107-17 passim 
Okhota r.-Urak r.p., 150 
Okhotsk, Sea of, 78, 83; o., 188 
Okhotskii p., 150 
Okov, forest of, source of the Dnieper, 


Olekma r., 78, 83, 148-49, 173-74 
Olekminsk o., 78, 188 
Oleshan, outpost, 159 
Olgerd, Lithuanian Prince (1345-1377), 

Olintorskii o., 190 

Olshanka r., 161 

Olshansk, 64 

Olym r., 60-61 

Om r., near the Transsiberian, 101 

Omolon (Oemokon) r., 150 

Omovzhar., 136 

Omsk, on the Transsiberian, 101 

Onega, Gulf of, 53, 99 

Onega r., 29,51, 118-19, 1 38~4o; system, 
138; Onega-Ladoga, 138; Onega- 
Volga, 139; Onega-Northern Dvina, 
139; Onega r.-Enitsa r.p., 140 

Onego 1., 29-30, 51, 53, 117, 138-39; 
Onego l.-Vytegra r.p., 29-30, 51, 53 

Onezhskoe L, see Onego L 

Opytovshchiks (entrepreneurs), 73 

Orchik r., 58 

Orel, town, 159 

Orel' r., 58, 126 

Orel'ka r., 58 

Oreshek (Noteburg, Schlusselburg) o., 

44"47 49-50, 53 
Osered r., see Seret 



Oshevenskii m., 180 

Oskol r., 58, 60, 63-64, 126, 161; old 
town, 63; new town, 64 

Oskolets r.~Seim r.p., 126, 131 

Osma r.-Ugra r.p., 109, 131 

Osokor o., 65 

Oster r .-Desna r.p., 131 

Ostiaks (government tribute-paying), 
72, 169-71 

Ostozh'e, landing place on Kama- 
Pechora route, 95 

Ostrogs (in Siberia), 165-75, 185-90; 
monasteries in relation to, 177-84; 
built on the advance toward the 
Black Sea, 155-63; see Furs, Monas- 
teries, Portages 

Ostrogozhsk, 64 

Osuga r., 1 15 

Osviacha (Gorodok), 21 

Otolovo l.-Luchanskoe Lp., 133 

Ottawa r., 3 

Outpost: Donets, 156; Putivl, 156-57; 
Rysk, 157; others, 157; Epifan, 158; 
Dedilov, 158; Novosil, 158; Mtsensk, 
158; Orel and Karachev, 159; Mesh- 
chera, 159; Shatsk, 159; Riassk (Ri- 
azhsk), 159 

Ozerishche l.~Emenets l.p., 135; Ozer- 
ishche l.-Odrovo l.p., 135 

Paala r.-Kavast r.p., 136 

Pacific Ocean, 2, 4, 8; expansion of 
Muscovite Russia to the Pacific, 66- 

Pakhnuttsova Doroga, 60, 63 

Pakhra r., 35, no; Pakhra r.-Lopasnia 
r.p., 35, no; tributary of Moskva, 35 

Paleostrovskii m., 179 

Panteleimonov m., 177 

Para r., 62 

Pavlov Obnorskii m., 181 

Pechenovo L-Msta r.p., 116, 138 

Pechora r., 29-31, 67, 124, 143-44; Pech- 
ora system, 143-44; Pechora-Mezen, 
143; Pechora-Northern Dvina, 143; 
Pechora-Volga, 143; Pechora-Ob', 

Pechorskii Volok, Pechora portage, 95, 


Peibas 1., see Peipus 1. 
Peipus L, 26, 50, 136 

Pelenovo I., 116 

Pelshemskii m., 181 

Pelyra o., 69, 160-70, 175, 186 

Peno l.-Zhadenie Lp., 114, 133 

Penzhina r.-Uiagan r.p., 150 

Penzhinsko., 188 

Penzhinskii (or Penzhinsk) p., 150 

Perechnaia r.-Sheksna r.p., 119, 139 

Perekop, 58 

Peremyzhskaia abatis, 161 

Perevolochna p., 129 

Perevolochnia r., 108; Perevolochnia 

r. Pshevka r.p., 126 
Perm, 31, 69 
Perm Velikaia, instructions of Tsar to, 


Pernava r., 136 
Pes'r., 116 
Peskovataia Tulucheeva (Podgornaia) 

Peter I, the Great, 22; wins the Baltic 

coast, 44-45, 52-53; builds canals, 92, 


Pertominskii m., 179 

Petropavlovsk (in the Far East) o., 190 

Petropavlovsk (on the Ishim), 101 

Peza r., 29; Peza r -Sake-Rubikha r.p., 
143; Peza r.-Lake-Tsilma r.p., 143 

Pezskii p., 143 

Piasina r.-Enisei r.p., 148; Piasina r.- 
Khatanga r.p., 148 

Pidma r.-Bolshma r.p., 119, 139 

Pil'va r.-Yk r.p., 123, 142 

Pina r.-Mukhovets r.p., 127 

Pinega r., 29; Pinega r.-Kuloi r.p., on 
Northern Dvina-White Sea route, 142 

Pinezhskii p., 142 

Pleshcheevo 1,-Koloksha r.p., 112 

Pnevitsy, outpost, 157 

Pocha r., 138 

Pochozero 1., 138 

Podgornaia r., see Peskovataia Tulu- 
cheeva r. 

Podkamennaia Tunguska r., see 

Poairkov, Vasilii, explorer, 82-83; dis- 
covers Amur agricultural region, 83 

Pokrovskii c. (Turinsk region), 182 

Pokrovskii c. (Verkhoturie region), 182 

Pokrovskii m. (Arkhangelsk region), 



Pola r., 28, 33, 114-15, 133, 137; Pola 
r.-Runa r.p., 114, 137; Pola r.-Vyd- 
bino l.p., 133, 137 

Poland (Poles), 22, 46, 52-53, 62; see 
also Lithuania 

Polia r., 112 

Polnyi Voronezh r., 160 

Polotsk, region, 14; princes and role of, 

Pontus, Sea of, see Black Sea 

Porech'e, Russian army retreats to, 23 

Porozovitsa r., 29, 93, 118, 140; Poro- 
zovitsa r.-Slavianka r., 118, 140 

Portagers (Volochane), 20-21, 153-54 

Portages (Voloki), and the important 
river systems, 107-51; in Siberia, 
especially, 165-75; monasteries in re- 
lation to, 177-84; on the road to the 
Black Sea, 155-63; Western Dvina- 
Dnieper, 155-64; sources of dispute, 
15; basically important to Novgorod, 
32-33; portages and portagers, 20-21, 
153-54; see Monasteries, Ostrogs 

Posolskii Preobrazhenskii m., 1 83 

Povenets, on the route from the Baltic 
to the White Sea, 53, 99 

Pozdyshka r., on the Wurttemberg 
Canal system, 95 

Pra r,, 1 1 2 

Predtechenskaia pustyn', 180 

Preobrazhenskii m. (Shenkursk region), 

Pripet' r., 127 

Pronia r,, 107 

Protva r., 23, 35, no; Protva r,-Moskva 
r.p., 23,35, 110 

Psel r., 60 

Pshevka r., 108; Pshevka r.~Perevoloch- 
nia r.p., 108, 126 

Pshevskii Hill, on the southern fron- 
tier, 158 

Psiol r., on the southern frontier, 156 

Pskov, 43, 44 

Pskovskoe 1., 136 

Ptich r.-Svisloch r.p., 128 

Punema r., 119 

Pupovo, landing place on Kama- 
Pechora route, 95 

Pushnia r v 121 

Putivl, important outpost in line of 
defense, 63, 156-57 

Pyshchug r.-Kudanga r.p., 121, 141 
Pyshma r., 101, 125, 144; Pyshma r.- 
Chusovaia r.p., 125, 144 

Rabaganskii m., 181 

Rafailovskii Troitskii m., 183 

Railroads in relation to portages, 100- 
i, 103; Transsiberian, 100-1; Smo- 
lensk to Moscow, 100 

Ranovaia r., 107 

Resa r., 109 

Reseta r.-Snezhat' r.p., 108 

Ressa r., 109; Ressa r.-Volok r.p., 109, 


Resseta r.-Snezhat' r.p., 108 
Rezh r.-Mezhevaia Utka r.p., 125, 144 
Riasa r., 107, 126; Riasa r.-Khupta r.p., 

107, 126 

Riassk, see Riazhsk 
Riazan, on old fortified line, 62 
Riazhsk (Riassk), 63, 159 
Riga, 20 

Roseta r.~Snezhat' r,p., 108 
Rostislav Mstislavovich (sixth son of 

Mstislav), 17 

Rostov, region of, 14, 20, 26, 33, 38 
Rostovskoe 1., 112 
Rozdornyi o., 162 

Rozhdestvenskii c. (Eniseisk region) , 1 83 
Rozhdestvenskii m. (Neviansk region), 


Rozsokhi, outpost, 157 
Rubikha r -unknown lake-Peza r.p., 


Rubikha r.-Lake-Peza r.p,, 143 
Rudnia, on Napoleon's line of march, 


Runa r. Pola r.p., 114, 137 
Rurik, distributes the towns of Russia, 


Rusa, Valdai Hills region, 43 
Russia, Kievan, 13-24 
Russian expansion into Asia, planned, 


Russo-Turkish War (1768-1774), sa 
Rutoveha r.~-$mall Berezina r.p., 3 
Ruza r., 15, 32, iio-i i; Ruza r,-Derzha 

r.p., no 
Rybinsk, Russia's waterway center, 93, 

Rybnoi o, 187 



Rylsk, frontier town, 63, 159 
Rzhev, Moscow-Rzhev Railway, 100 

St. Petersburg, see Leningrad 

Salar 1., in Siberia, 173 

Samara r., 58, 131-32 

Samintsovo 1., 115 

Samoied tribes, pay tribute in furs, 72 

Sarkel (Belaia Vezha), at portage from 

the Volga to the Don, 19, 65, 156 
Sara r., 112; see Sarra r. 
Sarra (Sara) r.-Solma r.p., 112 
Saskatchewan r., in Canada, 3 
Savinskii Ford, on the Donets, 156 
Savinskaia, outpost on the Donets, 156 
Savvo-Visherskii m., 177 
Schleswig, portage of Slien-Treene, 14 
Schliisselburg, see Oreshek 
Schugor r., 30,* Shchugor r.-Iatriia r.p., 

143-44; Shchugor r.-Vol'ia r.p., 143- 

Seim r., 58, 60, 126, 131, 157, 159, 162; 

Seim r.~Oskolets r.p., 126, 131; Seim 

r.-Severnyi Donets r.p., 126, 131 
Selenbinsk o., 188 
Selenga r., in Siberia, 82, 133, 147 
Selenginsk o., in Siberia on the Selenga, 

82, 173, 187 
Seliger 1., in Valdai Portage region, 25, 

32, 114-15, 137; Seliger L-Volotskoe 

Lp.,ii5, 137 
Selim, Sultan, 65 
Selizharovka r., Valdai Portage region, 

32, 114-15 

Sementsov Ford, on the Mecha r., 157 
Semigorodskaia pustyn', 181 
Senno, portage of, 23 
Serebrianka r.-Zheravlia r.p., 125, 144 
Serednee o., 174 
Seret (Osered) r., 61; Seret r.-Styr r.p., 


Serezha r.-Zhelno l.p., 134, 137 
Serpukhov, on old fortified line, 62 
Sestra r.,near theVlena and lakhroma- 

Kliazma portages, 113 
Setka r.-Suran r.p., 122, 141 
Severa, region in the Ukraine, 155 
Severnaia KeFtma r.-Dzhurich r.p., 

123, 141 
Severnaia Myl'ia r.-Iuzhnaia Myl'ia 

r.p., 142 

Severnaia Mylva r.-Iuzhnaia Mylva 

r -P-> \43 

Severnyi Donets, see Donets 
Severo-Ekaterininskii, Northern Cath- 

erina Canal, 95 

Sevsk, terminal of Svinaia Doroga, 60 
S'ezzha r.-Keza r.p., 116, 138 
Shara r.-Iasolda r.p., 127 
Sharzhenga r.-Iuza r.p., 120, 141 
Shat' r.-Don r.p., 108, 126; Shat' r.~ 

Volga r.p., 126 

Shatsk, on the frontier, 62-63, 160 
Shchukino v., on the Moscow- Volga 

Canal, 99 

Shebalinov Ford, on the southern fron- 
tier, 156 
Sheksna r., 30, 39, 117-19, 139; Sheksna 

r.-Perechnaia r.p., 119, 139 
Shelon' r., system, 42-43, 137 
Sheregodra L, 116; r., 116 
Sheremet'ev, general of Peter 1, 52 
Shilenga r., Battle of, 43 
Shilka r., 82-83, 147, 173 
Shingal (Sungari) r., 174 
Shomvukva r., 142 
Shosha r., 15, 32, 35, 111; Shosha-Lama 

tributaries of Volga, 15, 32, 35 
Shuia r., 120; Shuia r.-Monza r.p., 140 
Shuiskii, Prince Vasilii Vasilievich, 43 
Siamskii Rozhdestvenskii m., 181 
Sias' r., see Siaz* r. 

Siaz' r., on Tikhvin Waterway, 93, 116 
Siberia, river system, 8; routes by land 

and sea to, 28-29; conquest of, 68-88; 

administrative costs paid by fur 

trade, 86; see also Monasteries, Por- 
tages, Rivers 
Sibir, Kuchum's capital, taken by Yer- 

mak, 68 
Siksha (modern Dasyksha) r.-Voloch- 

anka (modern Mati?) r.p., 149 
Sitinets r., 1 16 

Sitka (Novo-Arkhangelsk), 88 
Sitnol., 116 
Siverskoe L, on the Wiirttemberg 

Canal system, 95 
Skhodnia r., portages from, 35; Skhod- 

nia r. Kliazma r.p., 111 
Skopin-Shuiskii, makes treaty (1609) 

with Swedes, 46 
Skovorodskii m., 177 



Skverna r.,on the southern frontier, 157 

Slavianka r., 118; Slavianka r.~Poro~ 
zovitsa r.p., 118, 140 

Slien, Gulf of, portage to Treene r., 14. 

Smolensk, ostrog, 5; strategic impor- 
tance of, 16-24; princes of, 17; Trade 
Codes of, 20, 28, 33, 42, 153-54; on 
Western Dvina-Dnieper portage, 


Snezhat' r.~Reseta r.p., 108, 131 
Sob' r., 29, 144; Sob' r.-Elets r.p., 144 
Soba r.-Luga r.p., 137 
Sogozha r.-Toshna r.p., 119, 140 
Soiginskii m., 181 
Solikamsk, important town on Ural 

frontier, 166 
Solma r.-Sarra (Sara) r.p., 112; Solma 

r.-Malaia Nerl' r.p., 112 
Solovetskii m., 53, 180 
Seminar., 116 

Sominka r., on Tikhvin Waterway, 93 
Somino 1., on Tikhvin Waterway, 93, 


Soroka, on the Stalin Canal, 99 
Sosna r., frontier river, 108, 157-58 
Sosva r., on the road to Siberia, 30; 

Sosva r.-Ilych r.p., 143-44; Sosva r.- 

VbPia r.p., 143-44 
Southern Kel'tma r., Northern Cath- 

erina Canal, 95; see KePtma r. 
Sozhr., 131 

Spaso-Kamennyi m., 181 
Spaso-Prilutskii m., 181 
Spaso-Sumorin m., 182 
Spasskaia pustyn' na Boru, 180 
Spasskii m. (Albazin region), 184 
Spasskii m. (Bratsk region), 184 
Spasskii m. (Eniseisk region), 183 
Spasskii m. (lakutsk region), 183 
Spasskii m. (St. Petersburg-Olenets re- 
gions), 179 

Spasskii m. (Tara region), 182 
Sredne-Kolymsk o., 188 
Stalin Canal (White Sea-Baltic Canal), 

97' 99 

Stalingrad (Tfcaritsyn), 65 
Stanitsy, mobile patrols, 66 
Stanovaia Riasa r., frontier r., 61, 157 
Stanovoi ridge, on Okhotsk Sea-Lena 

r. route, 83 
Sterzh L, i 14 

Stolbovo, Peace of, between Sweden 
and Russia, 47, 49 

Storozhi, stationary guards, 66 

Stroganovs, family of, 68-72 

Stromilovo L, 115 

Styr r.-Seret r.p., 127 

Suda r., 117 

Sudoma r.-Cherkha r.p., 136-37 

Sukhona r., 29-30, 39, 118-20, 140; Suk- 
hona r.-Kokshenga r.p., 140 

Suleva r., on Nogaiskaia Doroga, 61 

Sungari (Shingal) r., 174 

Sura r.-Seim r.p., on the southern fron- 
tier, 159, 162 

Suran r.-Setka r.p., 122, 141 

Surgut o., 72, 186 

Suvela r., on Nogaiskaia Doroga, 61 

Suzdal, 20, 33, 38; princes of, 38 

Sverdlovsk (Ekaterinburg), 95, 100 

Sviatogorskaia, on the southern fron- 
tier, 156 

Sviatoslav (third son of laroslav the 
Great), 17 

Sviatoslav (third son of Vladimir Mono- 
makh), 17 

Svidr., 118-19 

Sviiazhsk o., 43 

Svinaia Doroga, Tatar trail, 6o 157 

Svisloch r.-Usha r.p,, 128, 132; Svisloch 
r.-Ptich r.p., 128 

Sweden (Swedes), on the Neva, 25; in 
the portage system, 44-54; see Gus- 
tavus Adolphus 

Svir' r., 28-29, 5 l > 53. 93> **7> 138-39 

Sweri, see Svir' r. 

Sygva r., on Pechora-Ob' portage, 143 

Sym r.-Tym r.p., 145-46 

Synzhernskii m., 181 

Syrinskii m., 179 

Sysola r., 122-23, 1 4 1 Sysola r.~Volos- 
nitsar.p., 122, 141 

Syrkov c, 177 

Syz r.-Vesliana r.p., 123, 141 

Tabarinsk v., 167 

Tagil r., on portage route of the Volga- 
Ob' systems, 125, 165 

T&gil (or Tagilskii) Volok p., 125, 165 

Taka River, $ee Takai 

Takai (Taka) r., on the Nogaiskaia 
Doroga, 61 



Talitskii Ford, place of outpost, 157, 

Tambov (Tanbov), on the fortified line 

in the south, 64-65, 160 
Tangut, on the Chinese frontier, 175 
Tara o., on the Irtysh, 69, 168 
Tarbeev Brod, on the Voronezh, 61 
Tarkhansk o., on the Tobol, 169, 186 
Tatars (Tatar trails), 20, 25, 56-61, 72, 


Tauia r., on the coast of Okhotsk, 78 
Tavda r., in Siberia, 67, 69, 124, 167 
Taz, Gulf of, 146 
Taz r., 72-73, 146, 171 
Tazovsk, see Mangazeia 
Tebendin (Tebendinsk) o., 169, 186 
Telekina r., on the Stalin Canal system, 


Telekinskoe L, on the Stalin Canal sys- 
tem, 99 

Telemba, on the Baikal-Shilka road, 83 

Telembinsk o., 82, 187 

Teletskoe L, 175 

Terenin v., on the road from, Tara to 
Tomsk, 170 

Ternovskii Forest, near the Kalmius- 
skaia Sakma, 160 

Tetera, see Shomvukva 

Thannaim, see Niemen (?) 

Tikhaia Sosna r., on the southern forti- 
fied line, 61, 160-61 

Tikhvin p., 47, 93; Waterway, 92-93 

Tikhvinka r., part of Tikhvin Water- 
way (Canal), 93; Tikhvinka r.-Val- 
china r.p., 116 

Tim r., on the Muravskii Shliakh, 58 

Time of Troubles, Swedes take advan- 
tage of, 46, 52 

Titea r.-Churka r.p., 148 

Tiumen o., in western Siberia, 69, 167- 

Tiun (pi. Tiuny), Bailiff of the Por- 
tage, 15,20-21,153-54 

Tobol r., in western Siberia, 67, 69, 124- 
25, 168-71 

Tobolsk o., 69, 75, 78, 186 

Tobolskii Znamenskii m., 182 

Tolshma r., 120; Tolshma r -Kostroma 
r.p., 120, 140 

Tom r., in western Siberia, 72, 175 

Toma r.-Ket' r.p., 145 

Tomsk o., in western Siberia, 72, 171, 
i75> *86 

Tontora r., in the Lena-Amur portage 
route, 149 

Topornia v., on the Wiirttemberg 
Canal system, 95 

Tor o., on the Velikii Tor r., 65 

Toropa r.,on the Lovaf-Western Dvina 
route, 16, 133-34 

Toropets, key ostrog and seat of princi- 
pality, 16, 21-22, 24, 42 

Torzhok (Novyi Torg), key ostrog pro- 
tecting Vyshnii Volochek portage, 5, 
15, 20-21, 25, 27, 31-33, 42-43, 46, 54; 
see also Vyshnii Volochek 

Toshna r.-Sogozha r.p., 119, 140 

Totma, in Zavolochie, 39; see also 

Transportation by river, in Siberia, 
165-75; ky land, 165-75 

Transsiberian Railway, 100-1 

Tre, a territory belonging to Novgorod 

Treene r.-Gulf of Slien p., 14 

Troitskaia pustyn', 180 

Troitskii m. (Berezov region), 183 

Troitskii m. (Kirensk region), 183 

Troitskii m. (Selenginsk region), 184 

Troitskii m. (Tiumen region), 182 

Troitskii Gliadenskii m., 181 

Troitskii Kaisarov m., 181 

Troitskii m. (Shenkursk region), 180 

Troitskii Ust'-Shekhonskii m., 178 

Troitsko-Zelenskii m., 178 

Trostenka r., on the Kalmiusskaia 
Sakma, 161 

Trudy r., on the Volga-Don route, 108 

Tsarevo-Borisov o., on the southern 
frontier, 64-65 

Tsarevo-Zaimishche, on Napoleon's 
line of march, 23 

Tsargorod, see Constantinople 

Tsaritsa r., on the Volga-Don portage 
route, 65 

Tsaritsyn (Stalingrad) on the Volga- 
Don portage route, 65 

Tsilma r., 29; Tsilma r.-Lake~Peza r.p., 

Isna r., tributary of the Moksha-Oka, 

62; Tsna r.-Mstino L, 115, 138; Tsna 

Canal, 92 
Tfcymla r., tributary of the Don, 61 



Tugir p., in eastern Siberia, 83, 148-49, 
174; r., 83, 148-49 

JTugirsk o., in eastern Siberia, 83, 148- 
49> *88 

Tula, on old southern fortified line, 58, 
60-62, 65, 155 

Tungus tribes, 75, 82 

Tunguska r., in central Siberia, 73-74* 
78, 147-48, 171-72; Nizhniaia (Lower) 
Tunguska, 73-74, 78, H7~4S; Nizh- 
niaia (Lower) Tunguska r.~Kulenga 
r.p., 73-74, 78, 147-48; Verkhniaia 
(Upper) Tunguska r,, 73~74> 1 4T> 
Podkamennaia Tunguska r., 73-74* 
171-72,175 f f 

Tungusskii p., between the Emsei ana 
Lena rivers, 147 

Tunkinskii o., in the Enisei basin, 187 

Tura r., in western Siberia, 67, 69, 125, 
165, 168 

Turdeeva Media r., near the portage 
between the Upa and the Don, 158 

Turinsk o., in western Siberia, 69, 165, 
167, 186 

Turmyshevskaia Doroga, on the Via- 
zovna, 157 

Turmyshskii Ford, on the southern 
frontier, 157 

Turukhan r., a branch of the Enisei, 
146, 171-72, 175, 186 

Turukhansk o., on the Enisei, 75, 171- 
72, 175, 186 

Tutka r.-Khmelnitsa r.p., 120, 140 

Tutursk o., in the Lena system, 188 

Tver, boundaries of, 15, 31-33, 43 92 

Tvertsa Canal, 92, 100; r., 15, 32, 115; 
Tvertsa r.-Msta r.p., 32 

Tym. r., in the Enisei-Ob' area, 60, 145- 
46; Tym r.-Sym r.p,, 145-46 

Ucha r., part of Moscow-Volga Canal 

system, 99 

Uchur r., eastern Siberia, 82, 149 
lid r., in eastern Siberia, 82-83 
Uda r., flows into Sea of Okhotsk, 60, 

Udinsk o., later known as Nizhne- 

Udinsk, 82; see also Nizhne-Udinsk 
Udraika r.-Usha r.p., 135, 138; Udra- 

ika r.-Velikaia r.p., 136 
Udsk o., Okhotsk region, 78, 190 

Udy r., see Uda r. 

Uglich,.men from, 38 

Ugra r., 23, 62, 109, 131; Ugra r.-Osma 
r.p., 109, 131; Ugra r. tributaries- 
Viazma r.p., 23, 109; region through 
which Russian armies retreated be- 
fore Napoleon, 23; battle of the, 62 

Ui, with Niugzi forms the Turgirskii 
Volok, 148; see Tugirskii Volok 

Uiagan r.-Penzhina r.p., 150 

Ukhta r.-Govniukhva r.p., 142-43 

Ukhtoma r v on the Volga-Onega por- 
tage route, 118 

Ukhtornskii Volok, on the Volga- 
Onega portage route, 118 

Ukraine, annexation of, 64 

Ula r., on the Dnieper-Western Dvina 
portage route, 129 

Ulia (or Ul'ia) r., 78 

Ul'ia r., on the Lena-Ul'ia portage 
route, 78, 149 

Ulla r., on the Dnieper-Western Dvina 
portage, 129 

Unmak Pass, guarded by Unalaska Is- 
land of the Aleutian chain, 88 

Unalaska Island, guards Umnak Pass, 

Unimak Pass, guarded by Unalaska Is- 
land of the Aleutian chain, 88 

Unzha r., on the Volga-Northern 
Dvina portage route, 120 

Upa r., on the Volga-Don portage 
route, 56, 60, 62-63, 108, 158 

Uperta r,, on which an outpost at the 
Kamennyi Ford was located, 158 

Upper Tunguska r., see Tunguska 

Upper Volga Waterway, first and old- 
est of Russian canals, 92 

Ura r. -Niugzi r.p., 149 

Urak r.~Okhota r.p., 150 

Ural Mountains (Kamen'), 29-30; 
country of, 34, 67, 171 

Urka (Ura, Ui) r.-Niugzi (Niugcbl, 
Niunzi, Niunchi, Niuga, Niuza) r.p,, 

Uryv, Belgorod fortification zone ex- 
tends to, 163 

Usa (ancient Sob'-Musa) r,, 29, 128, 144 

Userd r., and town, 160, 163 

Usero, on the chief defense line of the 
south, 64 



Usha r., 128, 132, 135; Usha r -Svisloch 
r.p., 128, 132; Usha r.-Western Dvina 
r.p., 136; Usha r.-Nasva r.p., 135; 
Usha r.-Velikala r.p., 135 
Ushacha r. -Berezina r.p., 23, 128, 132 
Ushcha r.-Udraika r.p., 135 
Ushkuiniki (canoemen), see Novgorod 
Ushura (Ussuri?) r., 174 
Usmen l.-Lovat' r.p., 135, 137 
Uspenskii or Gornyi c. (Vologda re- 
gion), 181 

Uspenskii m. (Shenkursk region), 180 
Uspenskii Tikhvinskii m., 178 
Uspenskii c. (Tobolsk region), 182 
Uspenskii m. (Tomsk region), 182 
Ussuri (Ushura?) r., branch of the 

Amur, 174 
Ust'-Aldansk o., in the Lena region, 


Ust'-Dukichinskii o., in the Amur re- 
gion, 189 
Ust'-Elovka, landing place on the 

Kama-Pechora route, 95 
Ust'-Kut o., in the Enisei region, 187 
Ust'-Maisk o., in the Lena region, 189 
Ust'-Prorva o., in the Enisei region, 82, 


Ust'-Shchelinskaia pustyn', 180 
Ust'-Strelochnyi o., in the Enisei re- 
gion, 83, 188 
Ust'-Tausk o., in the Okhotsk region, 


Ust'-Uliisk o., in the Lena region, 189 
Ust'ia r., on the Onega-Northern 

Dvina portage route, 139 
Ustiug, northern river center, 43; 

Velikii, 166 
Usveia r., on the Dnieper-Western 

Dvina portage route, 129 
Usviacha r., on the Western Dvina- 

Lovat' portage route, 134-35 
Usviat r., on the Lovat'-Western Dvina 

route, 16, 134-35* 137; Usviat r.- 

Kunia r.p., 134, 137 
Usvitsa r.-Drut' r.p., 129, 132 
Utka, see Mezhevaia Utka 
Uza r,, tributary of the Shelon', 43; Uza 

r.-Cherekha r.p., 43, 136 
Uzda r., on the Dnieper-Niemen por- 
tage route, 128 
Uzhga r.~Kama r.p., 122, 141 

Uzlovaia, railroad junction in the por- 
tage from the Oka to the Don, 56 

Vad r., outpost on the southern fron- 
tier, 159 
Vaga r., on the Onega-Northern Dvina 

route, 139-40 
Vagai o. and r., on the route from 

Tobolsk to Tara, 168 
Vagulka r., in western Siberia, 171 
Vaigach Island, 29 
Vakh r., on the Ob'-Enisei portage 

route, 145 
Valaamskii m., 179 

Valchina r., on the Tikhvin Waterway, 

93; Valchina r.-Tikhvinka r.p., 116 

Valdai Hills, grand portage of, 1-9; 

region of importance, 13, 30, 32, 36, 

41-42, 44 

Valdai L, in Valdai Hills region, 42 
Valuiki o., on the southern frontier, 63 
Varangians, 3, 11, 13, 14* *9 
Varangian Sea, see Baltic Sea 
Vaselievskii m., 178 
Vazerinskoe 1., on the Wurttemberg 

Canal system, 95 

Vazuza r., 23, 36, 109, 113-14* 130-3 1 ; 
Vazuza r.-Dnieper r.p., 113, 130; 
Vazuza r.-Viazma r.p., 114, 131 
Vel' r.-Voloshka r.p., 139 
Velikaia r., 135-36; system, 136; Veli- 
kaia-Pernava, 136; Velikaia-Shel- 
on', 136; Velikaia-Lovat', 136; Veli- 
kaia r.-Usha r.p., 136; Velikaia r.- 
Nasva r.p., 136; Velikaia r.-Udraika 
r.p., 136 
Velikii Tor r., on the Muravskn 

Shliakh, 58, 65 
Velikii Ustiug, see Ustiug 
Velikoe L, on the Velikaia-Pernava 

portage route, 136 
Veritsa r.-Dnieper r.p., 129, 133 
Verkhne-Angarsk o., 82, 188 
Verkhne-Kamchatsk, 190 
Verkhne-Kolymsk o., 189 
Verkhne-Udinsk o., 82, 188 
Verkhne-Viliuisk o., 188 
Verkhnee o., at the sources of the 

Kolyma, 174 

Verkhoiansk o., on the lana, 79, 173, 



Verkholensk o., on the upper Lena, 82, 

Verkhoturie o., important Ural center, 

69, 165-66, 186 
Verkhozeiskoe o., in the Lena region, 


Verkolskii rn., 181 
Veska r., on the Volga-Volga portage 

route, 112 

Vesliana r.~Syzr.p., 123, 141 
Vetluga r., on the Volga-Northern 

Dvina portage, 121 
Vezhki, outpost, 158 
Viacheslav, Grand Prince of Smolensk 

(1054-1057), 17 

Viatka, base of Ivan III, 43, 121-22 
Viazenitsa r., on the southern frontier, 


Viazhltskil m., 177 
Viazma, 23, 109, 1 14, 130-31,* Viazma r.- 

Vazuza r.p., 114, 130; Viazma r.-Ugra 

tributaries r.p., 23, 109, 131 
Viazovna r., on the southern frontier, 


Viborg, 45, 53 

Viela r.-Kliazma r.p., 113 

Vikings, 13-14 

VilecT r.-Sysola r.p., 141 

Viliia (Wilia) r., 128, 132 

Viliui r., in central Siberia, 78 

Viliuisk o,, controls connection be- 
tween the Lower Tunguska and the 
Chona, 78; p., 148; r., 148 

Vioksa r., on the Volga-Volga portage 
route, 112 

Virts L-Peraava r.p., 136 

Vishera r., 69; on the Kama-Pechora 
route, 95; Vishera r.-Lozva r.p,, 124, 

Visherka r., on the Kama-Pechora 

route, 29, 95, 124 
Vitim r., in the Lake Baikal region, 

82, 173 

Vladimir, princely seat, 36; princes, 38 
Vladimir Monomakh (Grand Prince of 

Smolensk, 1073-1078), 17 
Vladychnia Kria, outpost at, 158 
Vlena (Viela) r.-KIiazrna r.p., 113 
Vodla r., on the Onega-Ladoga portage 

route, 138 

Vodlia r.-Kenozero Lp., 29 

Vodolaga r., tributary of the Mozh- 
Donets-Don, 60 

Vogulka r., on the Kama-Pechora 
route, 95; Vogulka r.-Volosnitsa r.p., 
124, 143 

Voguls, tribute-paying, 72, 167 

Vokhma r.-Entala r.p., 121, 141 

Vol L, on the Stalin Canal route, 99 

Volch'ia r.-Kalrmus r.p., 132; Volch'ia 
r.-Krynka r.p., 132 

Volch'i Vody r., on the Muravskii 
Shliakh, 58, 61 

Volga r., i, 4, 5, 14, 16-18, 30-33, 35-36, 
39, 65-66, 92; system, 107-25; Volga- 
Don, 107-8; Volga-Dnieper, 42, 
108-9, 11 3~ 1 4'> Volga-Volga, 109-13, 
115, 117; Volga-Western Dvina, 114; 
Volga-Lovat', 114-15; Volga-Msta, 
115-16; Volga-Ladoga, 116-17; 
Volga-Onega, 118-19; Volga-North- 
ern Dvina, 118-24; Volga Pechora, 
124; Volga-Ob', 124-25; trade route, 
33> 35-36; Upper Volga Waterway, 
92; Volga-Don Canal, 99-100, 107 

Vol'ia r., on Novgorod route to Siberia, 
go; Vol'ia r.-Sosva r.p., 143 

Volkov r., between Lake Ilmen and 
Lake Ladoga, 13, 26, 29, 45, 50-51, 


Volochane, see Portagers 
Volochaika, see Volochanka 
Volochanka (Volochaika) r., 146; Volo- 
chanka r.-Krugloe l.p., 146; Volo- 
chanka r.- Volochanka r.p., 14.5-46; 
Volochanka (modern Mati?) r,~Sik- 
sha (the modern Dasyksha) r.p., 14.9, 
Volochek, Bolshoi, p., 136; Malyi, p., 

136; Vyshnii, p,, 15, 115 
Volochnia r.-Kosba r.p., 115 
Volodskoe l.-Dolgoe l.p., 118 
Vologda, a great center on the way to 

the north, 30-31, 39, 119, 133 
Vologodskii Pesochnyi m., 181 
Volok r,-kessa r.p,, 109, 131 
Volok Lamskii, see Volokolamsk 
Volokolamsk, 15, 31-32, 35, 42, 54; on 
Moscow-Rzhev Railway, 100; see 
also Novgorod 



Volokoslavskii p., between the Chagoda 
and the Volozhba and between the 
Vakhina and Tikhvinka, 116, 138 

Volosha, see Volozhba 

Voloshba (Volosha) r. -Chagoda r., 116, 

Voloshevo I., 138; see Voloshozero 

Voloshka r., 138-39; Voloshka r.-Vel' 
r.p., 139 

Voloshna r.-Lama r.p., 111 

Voloshozero 1., 138; Voloshozero L- 
Chereva r.p., 138 

Volosnitsa r., 29; on the Kama-Pechora 
route, 95; 122, 124, 141, 143; Volo- 
snitsa r.-Sysola r.p., 122, 141; Volo- 
snitsa r.-Nydyb r.p., 122, 141; Volo- 
snitsa r.-Vogulka r.p., 124, 143 

Volotskoe L, 115, 118, 138; Volotskoe 
l.-Seliger Lp., 115, 137; Volotskoe L- 
Dolgoe Lp., 118, 139 

Volovo L, outpost at, 158 

Volovo (?) (Znamenskoe), railroad junc- 
tion near Kulikovo battlefield, 56 

Volozhba (Volosha) r. -Chagoda r.p., 

Volui o. and r., 160 

Vop' r., on the Dnieper-Western Dvina 
route, 130 

Vorgla r., on the southern frontier, 157 

Voria r.-Gzhat' r.p., 23, 109 

Voronezh o,, 63-64; r., 61, 64, 107, 157 

Vorskla r., 58, 60, 64, 162 

Voskresenskii c. (Beloozero region), 178 

Voskresenskii m. (Shenkursk region), 

Votria r.-Elsha r.p., 130, 133 

Votskaia Piatina (Wotskepetiniske 
country), 51 

Vozdvizhenskii m., 179 

Vozhanskoe L, on the Tikhvin Water- 
way, 93 

Vozhe 1., on the Volga-Onega portage 
route, 118-19 

Voznesenskii m. (Irkutsk region), 183 

Voznesenskii m. (Moscow region), 179 

Voznesenskii m. (Shenkursk region), 

Vselug L, on the Volga-Western Dvina 
portage route, 114 

Vsevolod (fourth son of laroslav), 17 

Vvedenskii m. (Krasnoiarsk region), 

i8 3 

Vvedenskii m. (Neviansk region), 184 
Vvedenskii m. (Shenkursk region), 180 
Vvedenskii m. (Solvychegodsk region), 


Vychegda r., 29, 95, 122-24, 141-42 
Vydbino l.-Pola r.p., 133 
Vydra r., 16, 130, 133; Vydra r.-Khvost 

r.p., 130, 133 
Vyg 1. and r., 99 
Vyksenskaia pustyn', 178 
Vym r., on the Northern Dvina- 

Pechora portage route, 142 
Vymskii p., between the Govniukha 

and the Ukhta, 142 
Vymskii Arkhangelskii m., 181 
Vyrka r., on the southern frontier, 161 
Vyshnii Volochek (Upper Little Por- 
tage), 32, 42, 92, 100, 115 
Vytegra r.-Kovzha r.p., 117; Vytegra 

r.-Lache Lp., 139; Vytegra r.-Onego 

Lp.. 29 

Welock, see Volkhov 

Western Dvina r., i, 5, 8, 13, 16, 18, 
35-36; system, 132-35; Western 
Dvina Niemen, 132; Western Dvina 
Dnieper, 42, 132-33; Western Dvina- 
Volga, 133; Western Dvina-Lovat', 
28, 133-35; Western Dvina-Velikaia, 
135; Western Dvina r.-Usha r.p., 136 

White Sea, 4, 29, 95-96 

White Sea-Baltic Canal (Stalin Canal), 


Wilia (Viliia) r., 128, 132 
Winnipeg 1. district portage, 2, 3; r., 2 
Witovt, Lithuanian ruler, 22 
WolcM<?e Volkhov 
Woods, Lake of the, 2 
Wotskepetiniske country, see Votskaia 

Wiirttemberg Canals, 93-94 

Yakutsk, see lakutsk 

Yenisei, see Enisei 

Yeniseisk, see Eniseisk 

Yermak, conquest of Siberia, 68-72; 

had "religious assistant," 86 
Yk r.-Pil'va r.p., 123, 142 



Zakamennoe o., on the Enisei, 172 

Zaonikievskaia pustyn', 181 

Zapadnyi Bug, r. on the Dnieper Vis- 
tula portage route, 127 

Zarachunskii Hill, an outpost In the 
south, 158 

Zashiversk o., 79, 173-74; 189 

Zavolochie, * ' Country-beyond- the- 
Portage," 26, 30-31, 35, 39 

Zeia r., 82, 174; Zeia r.-Katym r.p., 149 

Zelenaia r. Mutnaia r.p., 29, 151 

Zelenkov Ford, on the Mecha in the 
south, 157 

Zhabka r., tributary of the Volga, 46 

Zhadenie 1. Peno l.p., 114, 133; Zha- 
denie l.-Luchanskoe l.p., 133, 137 

Zhadore (Zhadenie) 1., on the Western 
Dvina Lovat* portage route, 133 

Zhelno L Serezha r.p., 134, 137 

Zheravlia r.-Serebrianka r.p., 125, 144; 

Zheravlia r.-Chusovaia Sylva r.p., 

125, 144 

Zhestovy Mountains, in the south, 161 
Zhigansk o., between lakutsk and the 

Lena, 78, 189 

Zhizdra r., on the Volga-Dnieper por- 
tage route, 108 
Zhizhitsa r., on the Western Dvina- 

Lovat' portage route, 134 
Zhizhitskoe L, on the Western Dvina 

Lovat' portage route, 134 
Zima, on the Transsiberian, 101 
Znamenskii c. (Irkutsk region), 183 
Zosimo-Savvatieva pustyn', 180 
Zosimy i Savvatiia m., 182 
Zusha r., on the southern frontier, 56, 

60, 108, 158 
Zverin Pokrovskii c., 177 * 

The of 

the by the 

of a Em- 

Is a story of Impos> 

In to 

that the role of 

Is for it 

tory, politics, 


but of 

ful which a peo- 

ple the 
of to the 

which they 

It was die Valdai re- 

gion, two 

of less one hun- 

dred and act 

than one thousand feet above 
sea level, which was utilized by 
the Vikings, which was die 
nerve center of the first Rus- 
sian state, which It possi- 
ble for Moscow to dominate 
the whole of the 

which taught its possessors 
the of the of 

eastern Europe. That lay 

In the domination of river sys- 
the control of por- 

Over rivers por- 

tages came the fur 
traders* Russian furs play- 
ing the leading role in the 

of Europe, Wfaea the 

the fur-bearing 

cued on -the Aleutian 

Islands, Alaska^ the of 

North America. Three conti- 


canalj and 
followed the 

a of re- 

corded history show the domi- 
nant of hunter^ patri- 
arch, feudal serf 3 aad 

to be the to the 
sea Graphically 
of rivers and portages,, a 
specially drawn series of 
twenty tnaf>s 5 give pictorial 
clarity to the emphasized 

The author^ is 

Professor of History In the Uni- 
versity of California^ is editor 
of the Publications of the 
Northeastern Asia Seminar^ 
books which, like this most re- 

publication, contribute to 
an understanding of events in 

part of the world where 
the interests of Russia., China,, 
Japan, Germany,, and now the 
United States meet. 

"The Urge to the Sea" contains 
xiv +190 pages, including bibliog- 
raphy and appendix,, with index 
added. Five cuts and twenty spe- 
cially prepared maps illustrate the 
text The book is bound in brown 
doth and priced at $2.50. 

124 368